Overview of the occasion for the judgment
The Local Court of Hanover had to address, in a case (Case No.: 550 C 13442/12, judgment dated 21.11.2013), the legal question of whether a request for a product review sent by email after the completion of an online purchase constitutes inadmissible advertising. The decision joins a multitude of judgments that evaluate electronic forms of communication in the context of consumer protection and entrepreneurial interest. At the center of the legal dispute was the balancing of the entrepreneur’s interest in customer reviews against the recipient’s right to protection from unsolicited contact. The ruling therefore provides important guidance on the scope and limits of electronically transmitted requests made in an economic context.
Legal framework for email communication
Distinction between transactional messages and advertising
The decisive factor for the legal classification of a review request by email is whether such a message is considered advertising within the meaning of Section 7(2)(3) UWG (Act Against Unfair Competition). According to established case law, a message counts as advertising whenever it is intended to promote sales or portray the company in a positive light. Purely informational communication, such as for contract processing, must not be mixed with advertising. Sending a direct request for a review after completion of the contract is expressly not a purely transactional process; rather, it pursues an indirect entrepreneurial goal—namely, increasing one’s own sales through positive feedback.
Consent as a legal standard
For sending advertising emails to consumers, prior express consent is required. The decisive regulation is Section 7(2)(3) UWG, which is intended to ensure the protection of individual privacy. Without consent, any advertising email is generally unlawful. These principles also apply to review requests, since their purpose is to induce the recipient to act in favor of the company. The Local Court of Hanover identified the lack of prior consent as the key problem of the email message.
The decision of the Local Court of Hanover in detail
Key findings of the judgment
The court made clear that the review request in the form of an email should be classified as advertising, as its ultimate goal is to improve the public representation of the company on rating platforms and thus promote sales. It is irrelevant whether the recipient is granted any advantage—such as others making better purchase decisions. The only decisive factor is that the request for a review was made without express permission. Sending such messages without prior consent violates the recipient’s rights and constitutes unreasonable nuisance within the meaning of the UWG.
Classification within existing case law
The decision of the Local Court of Hanover is in line with precedents set by the highest courts, in particular the Federal Court of Justice. Previously, other lower courts had also classified comparable review requests as unauthorized advertising. The disputed practice was consistently assessed according to the protective purpose of the UWG, namely, safeguarding the recipients’ economic autonomy and warding off unwanted advertising. This approach is also supported by European law requirements.
Impact on practice
Significance for companies in online commerce
Against the background of the judgment, online retailers and other companies must be increasingly cautious when making electronic contact after the conclusion of a contract. Although product reviews are an important element in competition, they must not be solicited by email if the customer’s express consent is lacking. The judgment clarifies the legal risks associated with violations of the UWG—from claims for injunctive relief to claims for damages.
Protection of consumer interests
This decision grants consumers strong protection of privacy. The possibility of being contacted via email without explicit consent is to be prevented in order to avoid a potential overload with advertising and dilution of the right to informational self-determination. This is in line with the general legislative goal of strengthening trust in electronic communication.
Summary and outlook
The judgment of the Local Court of Hanover highlights the legal importance of clearly differentiated consent for the sending of review requests by email. Especially in the area of e-commerce, the decision helps to sharpen the line between permissible contract communication and unauthorized advertising. Finally, the judgment serves as a reminder that entrepreneurial measures to increase sales must always be carried out within the bounds of what is legally permissible.
Ultimately, the current judgment illustrates the complexity of the legal classification of communication measures in the digital age. The legal situation can be judged differently depending on the individual case, which is why a careful review of the circumstances and legal framework is necessary.
For further questions regarding the handling of advertising emails and the legally compliant design of electronic communication, the attorneys at MTR Legal are available as competent contacts.
