Case law

  • Case Details
    • National ID: Sodba II U 353/2012
    • Member State: Slovenia
    • Common Name:link
    • Decision type: Administrative decision, first degree
    • Decision date: 16/01/2013
    • Court: Administrative Court of the Republic of Slovenia (external department in Maribor)
    • Subject:
    • Plaintiff: N/A
    • Defendant: Trade Inspection of the Republic of Slovenia
    • Keywords: misleading advertising, misleading statements, prizes
  • Directive Articles
    Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, Chapter 2, Section 1, Article 6, 1., (d)
  • Headnote
    Claiming that a prize will be received for free, whereas in reality the consumer is obliged to pay an income tax on this prize, constitutes misleading advertising.
  • Facts
    The case at hand is a first-instance decision in an administrative dispute procedure, following an administrative procedure.

    The plaintiff, in the course of his business, was advertising that when buying six electronics packages, one of those six packages would be received "for free".

    The defendant held that this constituted misleading advertising due to income tax being payable.

     
  • Legal issue
    Rather than formally being a part of the decision of the court in this case, the court simply reiterated the decision and reasoning of the defendant in the administrative procedure.

    Namely, any prize received by a consumer without consideration cannot be considered free since the consumer is required to pay income tax on that prize.

     
  • Decision

    Does claiming that a prize will be received for free, whereas in reality the consumer is obliged to pay an income tax on this prize, constitute misleading advertising?

    URL: http://www.sodisce.si/znanje/sodna_praksa/upravno_sodisce_rs/2012032113056227/

    Full text: Full text

  • Related Cases

    No results available

  • Legal Literature

    No results available

  • Result
    The plaintiff's request was denied.