Plaintiff, a telecommunications provider with significant market power, conducted a promotional campaign that included advertising through various communications channels (e.g. SMS, brochures, posters, IVR, etc.).
The defendant, an administrative authority, commenced a procedure to determine whether plaintiff’s campaign had been misleading towards consumers. It established that the content of the advertising messages differed greatly depending on the communication channel used. In addition, it was held by the defendant that the plaintiff also sent messages on other services whereby it committed aggressive commercial practices. As a result, the defendant imposed a fine of HUF 40 million on plaintiff.
Plaintiff contested the decision before the court on the basis that the defendant had not revealed all necessary facts, especially on whether the consumers had been actually misled or whether the misleading character of the practices was only "a possibility". In addition, plaintiff made reference to the general terms and conditions it provided on its website.
The court of first instance dismissed plaintiff’s appeal, agreeing with the defendant’s decision. Plaintiff further appealed on the same grounds.