© ibreakstock – Fotolia.com
At the request of Lampmann, Haberkamm & Rosenbaum Rechtsanwälte (LG München I, Beschluss v. 12.2.2018, Az. 9 O 1669/18) issued a temporary prohibition order against the Swiss Handelszeitung.
This prohibits the publication from questioning the validity of a business model in the Federal Republic of Germany with the inaccurate assertion that customers are being taken advantage of because they are offered merchandise in bulk at prices that are even higher than those charged for inferior goods in retail stores.
Handelszeitung did not respond to warning letter
The interim injunction against the Swiss company became necessary because Handelszeitung had not taken the opportunity to avoid court proceedings by submitting an out-of-court declaration of discontinuance and had simply left a corresponding letter unanswered.
Munich Regional Court I has international jurisdiction
What is interesting about the case from a procedural perspective is that the Regional Court of Munich I assumed international jurisdiction despite the fact that the Handelszeitung is based in Switzerland. This jurisdiction was derived from the fact that the Handelszeitung is not only distributed as a print version, but also as an e-paper edition and is therefore also available digitally in Germany.
False claim damaging to business
The Munich I Regional Court agreed with our client that the unfounded accusations interfered with our client’s entrepreneurial personality rights or the established and exercised business operations and were therefore to be refrained from.
The Chamber found that the claim was not only untrue, but also likely to impair our client’s business rights, in particular its acquisition prospects, because it gave potential buyers in Germany the impression that it was an economically unfavorable offer. This is even indicated by the article at issue in the preceding sentence before the challenged statement. It was therefore unjustified criticism of our client’s company.
Administrative fine of up to € 250,000, value in dispute € 30,000
In the event of non-compliance, a fine of up to € 250,000 or up to six months’ imprisonment may be imposed. The amount in dispute was set at € 30,000. The publisher has recognized the injunction as a final ruling.
In addition to the claim for injunctive relief, there are also claims for damages, which the injured company will assert in separate proceedings.
Lawyer Arno Lampmann from the law firm LHR:
“The Handelszeitung is generally not known for dubious journalism. For this reason and in view of the fact that, as the court explicitly emphasized, considerable economic interests are at stake here, it is very surprising that the report in dispute found its way into the Handelszeitung at all. A medium such as the Handelszeitung should actually know that poorly researched reporting – as in this case – can lead to considerable claims for damages.
Finally, it is remarkable that, given the international nature of the matter, the Handelszeitung apparently hoped that a German law firm would not also enforce its client’s claims against a Swiss company in German courts and that the matter could be settled with “Vogel-Strauß-Taktik”.”
Related posts
