OLG Hamburg confirms LG Hamburg: “Consumer protection association” may not claim “hidden costs” of an offer where there are none
Ihr Ansprechpartner
The Higher Regional Court of Hamburg has recently confirmed a decision of the Regional Court of Hamburg in the matter, which had prohibited a “consumer protection association” from distributing a disparaging advertising article following an application for a temporary injunction by Lampmann, Haberkamm & Rosenbaum Rechtsanwälte (LHR).
The concerned “consumer protection association”: In reality a vehicle for lawyer advertising
Professional law imposes certain restrictions on advertising by lawyers. Moreover, sceptical investors are not blindsided and are quick to recognize overly brazen client catches as such. This is why some colleagues try to give their advertising more respectability in the guise of a “protection association”, which in reality is not one. The Hamburg Regional Court has already prohibited this procedure in the past: LHR obtains advertising ban against “investor protection lawyers” due to non-existent “protection association”
However, there are also associations that actually exist, which are committed to consumer protection, but in reality only serve as a platform for soliciting clients.
Association preempts decision – OLG Hamburg would have confirmed the LG Hamburg
In a case represented by LHR, the Regional Court of Hamburg (LG Hamburg, Beschluss v. 21.4.2015, Az. 312 O 134/15) had now prohibited a report by the association on a complaint by an investor protection lawyer in which untrue and misleading claims had been made, such as that the offer contained hidden costs. In the event of a violation, the association or the executive board is threatened with a fine of up to EUR 250,000.
In addition to the unlawful statement in the publication, it was also piquant that the association bluntly allowed one of its “contract lawyers” to have his say. We reported.
The consumer protection association had appealed against the ruling to the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg. However, the Senate left no doubt at the hearing that it shared the assessment of the Regional Court and would therefore confirm the judgment of the court of first instance in full. The association subsequently withdrew its appeal. It was also ordered to pay the further costs of the proceedings (OLG Hamburg, Beschluss v. 1.3.2017, Az. 5 U 154/15).
Lawyer Arno Lampmann from the law firm LHR:
“Sometimes there are good reasons to doubt the prospects of success of an investment. These do not even have to be due to bad faith on the part of the provider. A wise step can then be to contact the well-known protection associations, such as the Schutzgemeinschaft der Kapitalanleger (SdK) or a lawyer. However, caution should be exercised against overly blatant advertising, especially when it comes from lawyers or lesser-known communities or associations.“
We specialize in the protection of companies and personalities. If you are one of those affected by unlawful reporting, please give us a call or send us an e-mail.
Ähnliche Artikel
Mehrfach ausgezeichnet.
