NEWS

Using an outdated strikethrough price is misleading

Regional Court Wiesbaden, judgment of 24 Apr 2025, 11 O 1/25 – Misrepresentation through an inaccurate reference price

 Contents

Background

An online retailer for model cars advertised discounts using strikethrough “reference prices.” These were not the most recent selling prices but amounts charged many months earlier (e.g., €72.95). In fact, the product had been offered weeks before for €39.00 and at times even for €31.20.

Decision

The court held the pricing display to be misleading, constituting an infringement of the German Price Indication Ordinance (PAngV) in conjunction with the unfair-commercial-practices rules under the UWG. Referencing an outdated, higher price suggests a greater discount than actually granted.

Court’s Reasoning: The strikethrough price must reflect the most recent price

Consumers reasonably interpret a crossed-out price as the previous selling price. A reference price that was not charged immediately before the price reduction misrepresents the actual savings.

  • The advertised €72.95 was not the last price charged.
  • Immediately prior to the promotional prices (€31.20 / €39.00), the retailer had not advertised €72.95.
  • Absent clarification, consumers may assume the strikethrough price equals the most recent price — which was incorrect here.

To the point

Strike-through prices must reflect the most recently charged price – outdated reference prices are misleading and violate German pricing law (PAngV/UWG

Case No.: District Court of Wiesbaden 11 O 1/25

Source: https://www.dr-bahr.com/news/werbung-mit-veraltetem-streichpreis-in-online-shop-ist-irrefuehrend.html

MORE NEWS
Trademark Law

AI & Branding: Europe’s brand work between “back to basics” and a GenAI leap

European marketing teams are putting branding back at the top for 2026—while GenAI is still rarely scaled broadly. At the same time, DPMA/EUIPO figures show sustained trademark activity.
Trademark Law

German Federal Court of Justice: No title protection for names of fictional film characters without an independent “life” – “Moneypenny”

The BGH clarifies: A fictional character’s name may in principle enjoy title protection—but only if the character itself is perceived as an independently “designatable” work (part) under trademark law. For “Moneypenny”, the court found insufficient individualisation and no sufficient detachment from the underlying work.
Trademark Law

GPTO enables EU-wide protection of regional products – new rights for craft and industrial goods

DPMA enables protection of geographical indications for industrial products such as knives, porcelain & watches – new EU regulation now in force.
Copyright / Design Law

Copyright protection for utilitarian objects: same test as for other works

The CJEU has held that utilitarian objects and works of applied art are protected by copyright under the same originality standard as any other category of works. It rejects a stricter threshold for everyday objects and provides detailed guidance on how national courts must assess originality and infringement in this context.
Copyright

Memorisation of AI training data infringes copyright

The Regional Court of Munich I has held that the memorisation of copyrighted training data in OpenAI’s GPT models infringes copyright. The judgment reshapes the legal framework for AI training and highlights key compliance risks for AI providers, rightsholders and companies using generative AI.
Trademark Law

No protection for Jägermeister’s well–known figurative trade mark “Hirschkopf”

Even for well–known trademarks, protection under trade mark law is only possible in so far as the opposing signs have at least a certain similarity.

Karin Simon
Lawyer
Certified IP Lawyer

Susanne Graeser
Lawyer
Certified IP Lawyer

Uhlandstr. 2
80336 Munich
Germany

Karin Simon
Rechtsanwältin
Fachanwältin für gewerblichen Rechtsschutz

Susanne Graeser
Rechtsanwältin
Fachanwältin für gewerblichen Rechtsschutz

Uhlandstr. 2
D-80336 München