European Commission

 

Case detail



Directive article Article 6
Article 7
National ID 8Sžo/40/2011
Country Slovakia Decision date 26/04/2012
Common name 8Sžo/40/2011 Decision type Supreme court decision
Court Najyvšší súd Slovenskej republiky (Bratislava) Plaintiff(s) Unknown
Court translation The Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic (Bratislava) Defendant(s) Slovenská obchodná inšpekcia, Ústredný inšpektorát Slovenskej obchodnej inšpekcie so sídlom v Bratislave, Prievozská 32, poštový priečinok 29, Bratislava (Slovak Trade Inspection, Central Inspectorate of the Slovak Trade Inspection with its registered seat in Bratislava)
Subject price
Keywords discountsmaterial informationmisleading advertisingprice informationprice reductions

+ Expand all

Headnote

Omitting to provide the consumer with adequate information on the product price, constitutes a misleading commercial practice.

Facts

This case deals with the breach of the unfair commercial practice prohibition by plaintiff in the form of misleading commercial practices.

In its product catalogue, on the front page, the plaintiff stated and highlighted the following statement "50% discount - every week different items for a half price". The second page of the catalogue contained a similar highlighted statement towards the consumer.

The offer in fact only concerned a repayment program where the consumer would repay the price in 33 monthly instalments. In reality, it was established that after 33 monthly instalments, the price of the product was always higher than the 50% announced.

The general terms and conditions, which contained additional information on the offer by the plaintiff, were presented in small letters and they were difficult to read for the consumer.

The Inspectorate of the Slovak Trade Inspection with its registered seat in Prešov for the Prešov Region (administrative body) decided that the plaintiff had to pay a fine amounting to SKK 200.000 (€ 6 638.78) as a result of a breach of the unfair commercial practice prohibition, as the calculation of the price of the product was not properly and unambiguously indicated.

The plaintiff appealed to the administrative body of the second degree (Slovak Trade Inspection, Central Inspectorate of the Slovak Trade Inspection with its registered seat in Bratislava). For this court, the appeal was dismissed.

The plaintiff again filed an appeal against this decision.

Legal issue

Does omitting to provide the consumer with adequate information on the product price, constitute a misleading commercial practice?

Decision

The Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic, in a short reasoning, fully agreed with the conclusions of the Regional Court in Prešov and stated that inaccurate information on the product price constitutes a misleading commercial practice.

  URL Decision Decision full text
EN N/A
SK N/A Click here

Result

The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Regional Court.

Additional information

Date Description URL
There is no events for this case.

Related case(s)

National ID Common Name Subject Country Link type
There is no related cases for this case.

Legal Literature

Title Author
There is no Legal Literature for this case.