CELEX: 62016CA0146
Language: en
Date: 2017-03-30 00:00:00
Title: Case C-146/16: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 30 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Verband Sozialer Wettbewerb eV v DHL Paket GmbH (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Unfair business practices — Advertisement in a print medium — Omission of material information — Access to that information via the website by means of which the products concerned are distributed — Products sold by the person who published the advertisement or by a third party)

22.5.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 161/4
            
         Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 30 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof — Germany) — Verband Sozialer Wettbewerb eV v DHL Paket GmbH
   (Case C-146/16) (1)
   
   ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Unfair business practices - Advertisement in a print medium - Omission of material information - Access to that information via the website by means of which the products concerned are distributed - Products sold by the person who published the advertisement or by a third party))
   (2017/C 161/04)
   Language of the case: German
   
      Referring court
   
   Bundesgerichtshof
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Appellant on a point of law: Verband Sozialer Wettbewerb eV
   
      Respondent in the appeal on a point of law: DHL Paket GmbH
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   Article 7(4) of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council must be interpreted as meaning that an advertisement, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which falls within the definition of an ‘invitation to purchase’ within the meaning of that directive, may satisfy the obligation regarding information laid down in that provision. It is for the referring court to examine, on a case-by-case basis, first, whether the limitations of space in the advertisement warrant information on the supplier being provided only upon access to the online sales platform and, secondly, whether, so far as the online sales platform is concerned, the information required by Article 7(4)(b) of that directive is communicated simply and quickly.
   
      (1)  OJ C 243, 4.7.2016.