Article 6 1. (d)
Article 7 1.
|National ID||J.nr.: 11/02116|
|Common name||J.nr.: 11/02116||Decision type||Other|
|Court||Forbrugerombudsmanden||Plaintiff(s)||Forbrugerombudsmanden (the Danish Consumer Ombudsman)|
|Court translation||The Danish Consumer Ombudsman||Defendant(s)||Stofa A/S|
|Subject||misleading commercial practices|
|Keywords||free, material information, misleading advertising, misleading omissions, precontractual information, price, price information|
+ Expand all
Marketing subscription service as being without charges, whereas in reality the trader charges the consumer a certain cost for setting up the service constitutes a misleading commercial practice.
The defendant marketed his mobile phone subscription as being without charges. When consumers bought the mobile phone subscription, however, the trader charged them DKK 99 (approx. EUR 13) for setting up the subscription plan.
Does it constitute a misleading commercial practice to market a subscription service as being without charges, whereas in reality the trader charges the consumer a certain cost for setting up the service?
According to the Danish Consumer Ombudsman it was a misleading advertising practice to market mobile phone subscriptions as being without charges when the trader charged consumers for setting up the subscription plan.
|URL Decision||Decision full text|
The defendant was fined DKK 200,000 (approx. EUR 26,800).
|There is no events for this case.|
|National ID||Common Name||Subject||Country||Link type|
|There is no related cases for this case.|
|There is no Legal Literature for this case.|