Rechtsprechung

  • Rechtssachenbeschreibung
    • Nationale Kennung: 6 U 30/11
    • Mitgliedstaat: Deutschland
    • Gebräuchliche Bezeichnung:N/A
    • Art des Beschlusses: Gerichtsbeschluss im Rechtsmittelverfahren
    • Beschlussdatum: 29/11/2011
    • Gericht: Schleswig-Holsteinisches Oberlandesgericht
    • Betreff:
    • Kläger:
    • Beklagter:
    • Schlagworte: advertisement, black list, editorial content
  • Artikel der Richtlinie
    Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, Annex I, 11.
  • Leitsatz
    Publishing an advertisement which is worded in an effusive way on a page of an editorial magazine or newspaper which is entitled "Advertisement Forum" does not constitute an infringement of the black listed provision on advertorial content.
  • Sachverhalt
    The plaintiff is an agency fighting unfair competition. The defendant is a newspaper publisher from Schleswig-Holstein.

    The defendant published an advertisement which praised in an effusive way the therapy methods of a cosmetician with the wording:

    "With strong waves against fat".

    The layout of the advertisement was identical to the layout of an editorial article and was published on a page which was entitled "Advertisement Forum".  The contact details of the cosmetician were printed at the end of the article. The plaintiff claimed an infringement of  § 3 III in conjunction with Annex Nr. 11 UWG.

  • Rechtsfrage
    Does publishing an advertisement which is worded in an effusive way on a page of an editorial magazine or newspaper which is titled "Advertisement Forum" constitute an infringement of the black listed provision on advertorial content?
  • Entscheidung

    The court denied an infringement of § 3 III in conjunction with Annex Nr. 11 UWG. The court reasoned that the average reader (consumer), being reasonably well informed and attentive, is able to perceive that he is not reading an article but an advertisement. This could be deducted from the label/title "Advertisement Forum" and the effusive description of the therapy methods. The court concluded that there was no sign covering-up the promotional nature of the advertisement and therefore there was no violation of § 4 UWG.

    Volltext: Volltext

  • Verbundene Rechtssachen

    Keine Ergebnisse verfügbar

  • Rechtsliteratur

    Keine Ergebnisse verfügbar

  • Ergebnis
    The plaintiff's request was denied.