For a few weeks - a specific time period was not specified in advance - the plaintiff, a shoes seller, was pursuing the so called “Great sales” campaign during which consumers were able to purchase shoes with significant discounts. The day after termination of the campaign and restoring previous prices of certain shoes, the plaintiff sent a great number of SMS messages to members of its loyalty club, stating that in the three following days they would be able to purchase shoes with additional discount. Moreover, a month after this, the plaintiff decreased the price of certain shoes even to a lower level than the price offered to the members of the loyalty club.
The defendant concluded that the above plaintiff’s practices were misleading actions with respect to the manner in which the price is calculated and concerning the existence of a specific price advantage, causing the consumer to take a transactional decision that he would likely not have taken otherwise.
The defendant further stated that the commercial practice of informing consumers about final discounts available only for a very limited period of time, whereas in reality certain prices are decreased to an even lower level later on, violates the general prohibition on unfair commercial practices as it is contrary to the requirements of professional diligence and materially distorts or is likely to materially distort the economic behaviour of the average consumer who it reaches or to whom it is addressed. Therefore, the defendant imposed a fine of LTL 6,000 (EUR 1,739) on the plaintiff.
The plaintiff appealed against the defendant’s decision before Vilnius Regional Administrative Court. The court rejected the appeal and the plaintiff further appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania.