(1) The court first stated that search engine optimization (SEO), indicating websites of which the content is controlled by the owner of the website and which may contain any kind of sales message prior to other websites, must be considered a form of marketing.
(2) Next, in order to define the notion "average consumer", the court concluded that it is unlikely that persons with a solid financial background would have an interest in the type of credit that was offered by the defendant. Hence, the court held, the average consumer must be defined as a person lacking a stable and solid financial background. As a result, the court considered that this form of marketing (SEO) was primarily directed towards this category of consumers.
Accordingly, the court stated that it could be assumed that this commercial practice had an adverse effect on the average consumer's ability of making a well-informed transactional decision. The court clarified that for this category of consumers, the prospect of obtaining fast and easy access to credit is particularly appealing, hence impacting their transactional decision.