|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)|
|Keywords||discounts, material information, misleading advertising, price information, price reductions|
+ Expand all
Omitting to provide the consumer with adequate information on the product price, constitutes a misleading commercial practice.
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.
Does omitting to provide the consumer with adequate information on the product price, constitute a misleading commercial practice?
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|
The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Regional Court.
|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.|