“
Federal Court of Justice ruling: clarity required regarding the lowest 30-day price
\r\nIn its judgment of 9 October 2025 (case no. I ZR 183/24), the Federal Court of Justice held that advertising with a price reduction is impermissible if the lowest total price of the last 30 days for the product is not clearly and unambiguously apparent to the consumer.\r\n\r\nAdvertising with discounts is an important marketing tool for retailers. Various advertising methods, such as traditional print advertising or digital channels, are used in a targeted manner to achieve different objectives, such as increasing brand awareness or acquiring new customers. There are various types of advertisements, such as text ads, display ads, or shopping ads, that companies can use to effectively address their target audiences. Under the European Price Indication Directive, the lowest total price of the last 30 days prior to the discount campaign must be stated in a way that is recognizable to the consumer. For sales, it is crucial that the final price is presented transparently and comprehensibly so that the consumer can clearly see the actual costs. The Federal Court of Justice has now also confirmed this with its ruling, according to the commercial law firm MTR Legal Rechtsanwälte, which, among other things, advises on competition law. Ultimately, compliance with the principles of price clarity and price accuracy is indispensable for legal certainty and consumer trust. The consistent implementation of these requirements is also of great importance for the economy, as it ensures compliance with legal framework conditions and fair competition.\r\n
Misleading advertising with a price reduction according to the Federal Court of Justice
\r\nWhy price information must be clear, visible, and legally compliant\r\n\r\nIn the underlying case, a competition association objected that a discounter’s advertisement with a price discount was misleading for consumers. In an advertising leaflet, the selling price for a coffee product was stated as EUR 4.44. In addition, the previous selling price of EUR 6.99 was stated and crossed out. The price reduction of 36 percent for the consumer was also shown. There was also a reference to a footnote. In the smaller-printed text it stated: “Previous 30-day best price, except: [beworbenes Kaffeeprodukt] 4.44”. The consumer therefore only learned from the footnote that the advertised product had already been available at the same price.\r\n\r\nEspecially when labeling sales units and stating prices for various items, it is important to comply with the statutory requirements on unit price indication. For many products, there is an obligation to state, in addition to the final price, also the unit price per quantity unit in order to ensure comparability of the sales units and transparency for the consumer; the price indication per sales unit is particularly relevant in order to provide clear guidance. The unit price indication must be clear and distinct for all affected items, whereby, pursuant to Section 2(1) of the Price Indication Ordinance (PAngV), letter b, the quantity unit and its relation to the sales unit are also regulated by law.\r\n\r\nThe plaintiff competition association viewed this price advertising as a violation of competition law and sued for an injunction. The action had already succeeded before the Higher Regional Court (OLG) of Nuremberg. The OLG regarded this combination of price information as misleading advertising and a violation of competition law. The difference between the presentation in the advertising leaflet and the statutory requirements is that, according to the understanding of the relevant public, price information and quantity units must be clear and understandable for the consumer. All details of the price indication must be presented transparently and comprehensibly in order to comply with the statutory requirements. The OLG made it clear that the lowest price the retailer has offered in the last 30 days must be easily recognizable to the consumer on the basis of the specific information in the advertisement. That was not the case here. In addition, it must be noted that the unit price indication can be provided not only in running text but also via a link, which is legally problematic, however, if the unit price is not immediately apparent.\r\n\r\nIn the context of advertising measures, targeted promotion of a product is crucial in order to attract the attention of the target group and increase sales. Specific examples of various advertising measures include discount campaigns, product placements, or highlighting special offers in leaflets.\r\n
Violation of the Price Indication Ordinance (PAngV) – decision in the appellate review proceedings
\r\nRequirements for transparent final price information\r\n\r\nIn the appellate review proceedings, the Federal Court of Justice confirmed the decision of the Higher Regional Court. The defendant’s price advertising violated the Price Indication Ordinance (PAngV) in its current version and was therefore unfair under Section 5a(1), (2) no. 2, Section 5b(4) UWG (Act Against Unfair Competition), according to the judges in Karlsruhe. The indication of final prices is of central importance for transparency and compliance with the applicable legal provisions. The Price Indication Ordinance aims in particular to protect natural persons as consumers by setting clear requirements for price labeling.\r\n\r\nSignificance of the 30-day rule for price reductions\r\n\r\nUnder Section 11(1) PAngV, in the event of any price reduction consumers must be informed of the lowest total price of the goods that the trader actually charged consumers in the 30 days prior to the promotion. The regulation specifies the conditions under which the price indication must be made correctly. It is not sufficient for the reference price to be stated in small print in a footnote. Rather, this information must be unambiguous for the consumer, clearly recognizable, and easily legible. Only then can the consumer assess the price reduction. The statutory requirements take effect by ensuring the binding nature and enforceability of the price indications.\r\n\r\nIt is crucial that the implementation of price indications is carried out in a prudent manner and in compliance with the law in order to avoid legal risks and strengthen consumers’ trust.\r\n\r\nIn addition, it is important that the services offered by companies are presented clearly and transparently in order to ensure comprehensible pricing and comparability of offers. The topic of price transparency is of great importance for companies, as it significantly influences market position and customer trust. The company’s role in implementing the Price Indication Regulation is to carefully fulfill all legal requirements and adjust price indications accordingly.\r\n\r\nThe purpose of the Price Indication Regulation is to create a fair and transparent basis of information for consumers and to prevent distortions of competition. There are various ways in which companies can implement price indications, for example by clear labeling on the product, in advertising, or in the online shop. The reason for these statutory requirements is that consumers are protected against misleading price indications and can make an informed purchasing decision.\r\n\r\nBy correctly stating final prices, consumers are able to compare different offers better with one another.\r\n
Obligation to state the total price under Section 3 PAngV
\r\nWhy the total price is a central element of price clarity\r\n\r\nThe obligation to state the total price is a central element of the Price Indication Regulation (PAngV) and plays a decisive role for price clarity and price accuracy in commercial transactions. Under Section 3(1) PAngV, traders are obliged, with every offer or advertisement for goods or services addressed to consumers, to state the total price. This total price must include all price components, in particular VAT as well as all other costs incurred for the respective good or service.\r\n\r\nStating the total price ensures that consumers can see at a glance what costs they will actually incur. This applies regardless of whether the goods or services are offered in brick-and-mortar retail, on the internet, or in other media. The rule concerns not only traditional retail but also other businesses and any type of business offering goods or services. The PAngV requires that prices must be clearly displayed either directly on the goods, on price tags, or in the immediate vicinity of the goods in a clearly visible manner. For digital offers as well, a clear and easily legible display of the total price is mandatory. The obligation to indicate prices applies to everything—i.e., to all media, channels, and platforms, including other methods of price labeling. For services dependent on labor or consumption, such as energy or water billing, a transparent labor-related price indication is required. Price tags and labels should also include the company’s logo in order to strengthen brand identification and clearly attribute the price labeling. In public spaces, advertising installations (installations) also play an important role in price labeling, as they increase the visibility and transparency of price indications.\r\n\r\nWith the revised version of the Price Indication Regulation, the requirements for price indication were further specified. The aim is to make price comparability easier and to protect consumers from hidden costs or misleading price components. Price indication thus serves as a solution to transparency problems and promotes consumer trust. Traders must therefore ensure that their price indications are transparent, complete, and easy for the consumer to understand—regardless of the advertising method chosen.\r\n\r\nThe obligation to state the total price is not only a legal requirement but also an important contribution to consumer protection. It enables people and customers to compare different offers and prices objectively and to make informed purchasing decisions. Violations of this obligation can not only impair customer trust but also entail legal consequences.\r\n\r\nOverall, the correct statement of the total price is an essential component of the PAngV and an indispensable instrument for price clarity and price accuracy in the interest of consumers and companies alike.\r\n
Price indications for distance contracts – transparency in online retail
\r\nRequirements for e-commerce, telephone, and email transactions\r\n\r\nIn the case of distance-selling contracts—i.e., contracts concluded without the simultaneous physical presence of the trader and the consumer, such as online shopping, orders by telephone or email—special requirements apply to price information. The Price Indication Ordinance (PAngV) ensures that consumers are comprehensively and transparently informed about prices even through these modern distribution channels. Especially in online retail, correct price indication for various products is crucial to ensure fair competition.\r\n\r\nPursuant to the PAngV, businesses must make all relevant price information in distance-selling contracts clear, comprehensible, and easily legible. This means that the stated price must include all price components, such as value-added tax and, where applicable, shipping costs. Only in this way can consumers grasp the actual costs of an offer or a service at a glance and compare different offers or products with one another. A further requirement for the conclusion of distance-selling contracts is that all statutory information obligations, in particular those concerning prices, are fulfilled in full.\r\n\r\nRelevance of complete price information before the contract is concluded\r\n\r\nThe PAngV also obliges businesses to present all price information, already prior to the conclusion of the distance-selling contract, in such a way that no hidden costs arise and the prices are clearly traceable. This applies regardless of whether the subject matter is goods or services. Especially in online retail, it is important that the total price as well as all other price components are clearly stated so that consumers can make a fair and informed purchasing decision. Transparent price information directs consumers’ attention specifically to the actual costs and thus promotes trust in the provider.\r\n\r\nThrough these provisions, the Price Indication Ordinance makes a significant contribution to price clarity and price accuracy in distance selling. The history of distance-selling rules shows that the legislature has continuously responded to developments in online retail in order to strengthen consumer protection. Businesses that do not present their price information in accordance with statutory requirements risk not only the trust of their customers but also legal consequences. For consumers, this means greater transparency and security when shopping on the internet or in other distance-selling transactions.\r\n\r\nA brief digression: Special price-information obligations apply to consumer loans. The annex to the Price Indication Ordinance contains the mathematical formula for calculating the effective annual interest rate, taking into account the amounts disbursed under the consumer loan and their repayment modalities. Changes to the contractual conditions, such as variable interest rates, must also be presented transparently, as they affect the total cost of the loan.\r\n
Refundable security (deposit) under Section 7 PAngV
\r\nWhy the deposit is not part of the total price\r\n\r\nThe refundable security, also known as a deposit, is an important component of the Price Indication Ordinance (PAngV) and affects numerous goods and services that businesses offer to consumers. Under Section 7 PAngV, traders are required to always state separately and clearly the amount of a refundable security that is demanded in addition to the total price of a good or service. This security is not part of the total price because, under certain conditions, it is repaid to the consumer—for example, when an empty bottle is returned.\r\n\r\nFor consumers, the clear indication of the refundable security is of great importance, as it enables them to see at a glance which costs actually accrue permanently and which amounts they will receive back when returning the goods or using the service. This promotes price clarity and price accuracy, which are central objectives of the Price Indication Ordinance. Only through transparent price indication can consumers make informed decisions when purchasing goods or using services.\r\n\r\nTransparency obligations for businesses\r\n\r\nBusinesses and traders must therefore ensure that the amount of the refundable security is displayed in a clearly visible and understandable manner—whether at the point of sale, in advertising materials, or on the company website. The information should be provided in such a way that no misunderstandings arise about the composition of the total price and that all price components are clear to consumers.\r\n\r\nThe provisions on refundable security are another important step to increase transparency in economic life and to strengthen consumers’ trust in price labelling. Businesses that conscientiously fulfil their obligations under the PAngV thereby underscore their customer orientation and avoid legal risks in connection with the Price Indication Ordinance.\r\n
Reference price difficult for the consumer to discern – consequences
\r\nFederal Court of Justice (BGH): Lack of visibility of the 30-day lowest price as a breach of competition law\r\n\r\nThe BGH criticized that these requirements were not met in the present case. Because of the information in the advertising leaflet, the reference price was difficult to discern. As a result, the consumer was denied an essential piece of information about the lowest price in the last 30 days. However, the consumer must be able to recognize and understand the price without difficulty. Therefore, there was a breach of competition law, and the price advertising in this form was impermissible, according to the BGH.\r\n\r\nThe Federal Court of Justice (BGH) also referred to the case law of the European Court of Justice, according to which consumers should be enabled to compare selling prices more easily so that they can make an informed decision. For this purpose, the selling price must be presented to consumers in an unambiguous manner, clearly recognizable and easy to read.\r\n\r\nThe BGH’s decision is regarded as an important notice for companies and consumers to ensure compliance with the Price Indication Ordinance (Preisangabenverordnung).\r\n
Protecting consumers against misleading price indications
\r\nEU directives and ECJ case law as the basis\r\n\r\nThe BGH further stated that Article 6a of European Directive 98/6/EC is intended to protect consumers against misleading price indications. However, this objective would be undermined if retailers were allowed to increase the price before announcing a price reduction and then advertise price reductions that are, in substance, not real.\r\n\r\nIn its judgment of 26 September 2024, the ECJ held that, when advertising price reductions, the reduction must be stated on the basis of the lowest price in the preceding 30 days (Case No.: C-330/23). The BGH has now made it clear that the lowest price of the last 30 days must not only be stated, but must also be presented in such a way that it is readily recognizable by the consumer without difficulty. This gives rise to an obligation for companies to comply with all statutory requirements on price transparency and price indication.\r\n\r\nCompanies should therefore, if necessary, reconsider their advertising strategy. Because violations of competition law may result in warning letters, actions for injunctive relief, and claims for damages. It is particularly important to address customers in a targeted manner and to take their interests into account when designing advertising measures. Advertising messages play a central role in ensuring price transparency and strengthening consumer protection.\r\n\r\nThe commercial law firm MTR Legal Rechtsanwälte provides comprehensive advice in competition law.\r\n\r\nFeel free to contact us!\r\n\r\n “
