Case law

  • Case Details
    • National ID: Vj/127-030/2009
    • Member State: Hungary
    • Common Name:link
    • Decision type: Administrative decision in appeal
    • Decision date: 12/05/2011
    • Court: Competition Authority (Budapest)
    • Subject:
    • Plaintiff: Procedure initiated by the Competition Authority
    • Defendant: Parapszichológiai Centenáriumi Központ Kft.
    • Keywords: false impression, free, games of chance, prizes
  • Directive Articles
    Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, Annex I, 16. Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, Annex I, 20. Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, Annex I, 31.
  • Headnote
    In this case, sections 16, 20 and 31 of the black list were applied.
  • Facts
    The defendant published advertisements in magazines offering assistance to consumers who had financial difficulties; in addition gifts were also offered.

    The advertisements included a coupon as well, which indicated that the consumers returning the coupon were entitled to a free gift. The consumers who returned the coupon received materials suggesting that the consumer was entitled to a free gift of a high value, provided that he/she returned a letter of acceptance. The general terms and conditions of the lottery were also included in the package, however, it was established that these terms and conditions were of bad quality as the legibility was highly limited.

    The consumers who returned the letter of acceptance kept receiving further materials.

  • Legal issue
    The Competition Authority first noted that section 16 of the black list to the UCP Directive (as implemented in Hungarian law) establishes that the following qualifies as an unfair commercial practice: "claiming that products are able to facilitate winning in games of chance". As a result, the Authority held that the advertisings in the magazines were unlawful on the basis of the cited legal ground.

    Next, the Competition Authority reminded section 20 and 31 of the same black list. In a short reasoning, the Authority considered that both provisions could equally be applied in this case.

  • Decision

    Under which circumstances can sections 16, 20 and 31 of the black list be applied?


    Full text: Full text

  • Related Cases

    No results available

  • Legal Literature

    No results available

  • Result
    The Competition Authority imposed a fine of HUF 46,000,000 (approx. EUR 174,000) on the defendant.