The new Price Indication Ordinance (PAngV) came into force on May 28 last year and introduced new obligations for price reductions for the first time. Since then, there have been specifications regarding the setting and indication of the lowest total price of the last 30 days. The Hamburg Higher Regional Court had to decide whether, in addition to this previous price, further information had to be given when comparing prices.
I. The facts
The defendant advertised its goods online and stated a price of €3.99 for a product. In doing so, she added a strikethrough price of “€4.99 (20.04% saved)”, which matched the previously lowest total price over the past 30 days.
The plaintiff, a competition association, considered this to be insufficient and gave reasons § 11 PAngV but a more extensive information obligation.
According to § 11 PAngV, it is not enough to ensure that the comparative price given is the cheapest in the last 30 days.
Rather, it should have been clarified that the crossed-out price was the cheapest price of the last 30 days.
In the absence of any reference to the quality of the crossed-out price, the defendant violated § 11 PAngV.
After an unsuccessful warning and a loss in the first instance before the LG Hamburg, the plaintiff continued to pursue her request with an appeal.
II. The decision
The Hamburg Higher Regional Court clarified in its decision of December 12, 2022 (Az: 3 W 38/22) that the mere indication of the strike-through price was sufficient.
After § 11 PAngV is only to ensure that this is the cheapest of the last 30 days.
There is no further obligation to provide information about the nature of the prize. No additional indication is therefore required that the reference price reflects the lowest price demanded within the last 30 days.
The purpose of Section 11 PAngV is to improve consumer information in cases where a price reduction is used for advertising purposes. In particular, paragraph 1 of the standard is intended to prevent total prices being given as reference values in advertising with price reductions, which had never been requested before or had been raised for a short time before.
§ 11 PAngV is the price indication legal instrument to combat moon prices and is complementary to the § 5 UWG. The wording of § 11 PAngV does not specify how the reference price is to be indicated.
The explanatory memorandum to the law also expressly only provides for such an additional obligation if, when the price is displayed, it becomes unclear through further information, such as other prices, that the crossed-out price is a reference price.
III. Conclusion
If a new lower price is compared to a previous one, according to the provision it is only necessary to ensure that the previous one is the last lowest price.
Additional information about the nature of the prize is not required. In the case of price comparisons with your own older price, § 11 PAngV does not require you to explicitly mark the latter as the cheapest price of the last 30 days.
Tip: Do you have any questions about the post? Feel free to discuss this with us in the
Entrepreneur group of the IT law firm on Facebook.