Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:23:25.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The New Law Against Unfair Competition: An Assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Manuela Finger  and
Sandra Schmieder

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

July 8, 2004, marked a cornerstone for the German law against unfair competition. The amending Statute Against Unfair Competition (UWG 2004) came into force on that day. That day also ended a long discussion among researchers who had called for a thorough modernization of the UWG. In particular, researchers criticized the prohibitions on sales promotion; these prohibitions are now abolished. Furthermore, the new UWG addresses European Union demands for greater liberalization and consumer protection, especially with respect to the electronic communications sector. The new law is a complete reorganization of the old act of 1909. The revised UWG is much more liberal, but still guarantees a high standard of protection for consumers and competitors.

Type
Developments
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 6 , Issue 1: Articles: Special issue - A Dedication to Jacques Derrida , 01 January 2005 , pp. 201 - 216
Copyright
Copyright © 2005 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 Gesetz gegen den unlauteren Wettbewerb (UWG), BGBl. I 2004, 1414 of July 3, 2004.Google Scholar

2 See e.g. the Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications), O.J. L 201, 37.Google Scholar

3 Gesetz gegen den unlauteren Wettbewerb (UWG) of June 7, 1909, RGBl. 1909, 499, last amended July 23, 2002, BGBl. I 2002, 2852.Google Scholar

4 Sec. 7, 8 UWG 1909.Google Scholar

5 Rabattgesetz of November 25, 1933, RGBl. I 1933, 1011, last amended July 25, 1986, BGBl. I 1986, 1172.Google Scholar

6 Zugabeverordnung of March 9, 1932, RGBl. I 1932, 121, last amended July 25, 1994, BGBl. I 1994, 1688.Google Scholar

7 See the explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 12.Google Scholar

8 See The Regulation governing free gifts with sales of July 23, 2001 (BGBl. I 2001, 1661) and The Act on the Abrogation of the Statute on Discounts of July 23, 2001 (BGBl. I 2001, 1663).Google Scholar

9 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market ('Directive on electronic commerce') (O.J. L 178, 1). Pursuant to the country of origin principle in Art. 3 I entrepreneurs must only comply with the national laws at their business location. This provision could have resulted in a discrimination of German entrepreneurs, if the stringent provisions on discounts and giveaways had remained in force (see also http://www.bundesregierung.de/artikel,413.26160/Rabattgesetz-und-Zugabeverordn.htm).Google Scholar

10 See sec. 7, 8 UWG 1909.Google Scholar

11 Amended proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation concerning sales promotions in the Internal Market (presented by the Commission pursuant to Article 250 para. 2 of the EC Treaty) as of October 25, 2002, COM (2002) 585 final.Google Scholar

12 Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the Internal Market and amending directives 84/450/EEC, 97/7/EC and 98/27/EC (the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive) of June 18 2003.Google Scholar

13 COM (2001) 531 final.Google Scholar

14 Hiltrud Breyer, Report on the Politics of the EU on Consumer Protection (September 20, 2004), at http://www.hiltrud-breyer.de/breyer/breyer/themen/positionspapiere/2003-11-18.html.Google Scholar

15 See the explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 12.Google Scholar

16 See Press Release of the EU, IP/04/1364 of Nov. 16, 2004; Gralf-Peter Calliess, (Conflict) Principles of (Consumer) Contract Law – An Update, 5 German Law Journal 957, 962 f. (2004), at http://www.germanlawjournal.com/pdf/Vol05No08/PDF_Vol_05_No_08_957-967_EU_Calliess.pdf.Google Scholar

17 Directive 2002/58/EC on privacy and electronic communications, O.J. L 201, 37.Google Scholar

18 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 12.Google Scholar

19 Directive 2002/58/EC on privacy and electronic communications, O.J. L 201, 37, 45 f.Google Scholar

20 See infra text at [3.3.1].Google Scholar

21 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 13, 15 f.; see also BGHZ 140, 134 (138) – Hormonpräparate; BGH NJW 2000, 864 – Giftnotruf-Box; BVerfG WRP 2001, 1160 – Therapeutische Äquivalenz; BVerfG GRUR 2002, 455 – Tier- und ArtenschutzGoogle Scholar

22 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 13.Google Scholar

23 E.g. BGH GRUR 1957, 365 – Suwa; BGH GRUR 1982, 425 (430 f) – Brillen-Selbstabgabestellen; BGH GRUR 1999, 751 (753) – Güllepumpen; BGH GRUR 2001, 354 (356) – Verbandsklage gegen Vielfachabmahner.Google Scholar

24 Sec. 2 para. 1 no. 1 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

25 Sec. 2 para. 1 no. 2 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

26 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 16. See also to the hitherto existing law Baumbach/Hefermehl, Wettbewerbsrecht, 22. Aufl., Einl. UWG Rdn. 226 zum mittelbaren Wettbeverbsverhaeltnis.Google Scholar

27 Telekommunikationsgesetz of July 25, 1996, BGBl. I 1996, 1120, last amended May 5, 2004, BGBl. I 2004, 718.Google Scholar

28 Gesetz über die Nutzung von Telediensten of July 22, 1997, BGBl. I 1997, 1870, last amended December 14, 2001, BGBl. I 2001, 3721.Google Scholar

29 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 16.Google Scholar

30 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 16.Google Scholar

31 Sec. 3 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

32 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 13.Google Scholar

33 See sc. 4-7 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

34 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 13, 16.Google Scholar

35 See also Günter Zettel, Verbotstatbestände im neuen UWG, Monatsschrift des Deutschen Rechts 1099 (2004).Google Scholar

36 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 17, 19, 20.Google Scholar

37 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 18.Google Scholar

38 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 18.Google Scholar

39 Statement of the Bundesregierung, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 41; Christian Scharpf, Drittschutz für die Privatwirtschaft?, Gewerbearchiv 317, 318 (2004). See to the hitherto existing law BGH GRUR 2002, 825 (826) – Elektroarbeiten; BGH GRUR 2003, 164 (165) – Altautoversorgung; BGH WRP 2004, 376 (381) – Strom und Telefon I; BGH WRP 2004, 382 (3859 – Strom und Telefon II.Google Scholar

40 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 13.Google Scholar

41 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 19.Google Scholar

42 Sec. 5 paras. 4 and 5 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

43 Sec. 5 para. 4 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

44 Sec. 5 para. 5 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

45 No. 1.Google Scholar

46 No. 3.Google Scholar

47 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 15. BGH GRUR 1970, 523 – Telefonwerbung I; BGH GRUR 1989, 753 – Telefonwerbung II; BGH GRUR 1990, 280 (281) – Telefonwerbung III; BGH GRUR 1991, 764 – Telefonwerbung IV; OLG Frankfurt GRUR 1983, 674 – Lästiger Anlageberater; BGH GRUR 1973, 211 (212) – Telexwerbung; BGH GRUR 1996, 208 – Telefax-Werbung.Google Scholar

48 Directive 2002/58/EC on privacy and electronic communications, O.J. L 201, 37.Google Scholar

49 Sec. 7 para. 2 no. 1, 3 and 4.Google Scholar

50 Sec. 7 para. 2 no. 2 UWG 2004. See infra text at 4.4.Google Scholar

51 Sec. 7 para. 2 no. 2 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

52 For a critical assessment of this solution see infra text 4.4.Google Scholar

53 Sec. 5 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

54 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 14.Google Scholar

55 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 14.Google Scholar

56 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 14.Google Scholar

57 Sec. 6, 6a, 6b UWG 1909.Google Scholar

58 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 15.Google Scholar

59 See, e.g., formerly sec. 13, 19 UWG of 1909.Google Scholar

60 Sec. 935, 940 ZPO (German Code of Civil Procedure) can more easily proof the urgency of a preliminary injunction (sec. 12 para. 2 UWG 2004).Google Scholar

61 Sec. 10 UWG 2004, see below under [3.4.1.2].Google Scholar

62 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 14.Google Scholar

63 Sec. 13a UWG 1909.Google Scholar

64 Sec. 11 para. 2 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

65 Statement of the Bundesrat, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 35 f.Google Scholar

66 Zettel, Günter, Das neue Gesetz gegen den unlauteren Wettbewerb, Monatsschrift des Deutschen Rechts 1040, 1042 (2004).Google Scholar

67 Sec. 8 para. 3 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

68 See, e.g., sec. 13 para. 2 UWG of 1909.Google Scholar

69 See sec. 93 ZPO (German Code of Civil Procedure). Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 25.Google Scholar

70 Sec. 12 para. 1 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

71 Sec. 12 para. 1 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

72 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 25.Google Scholar

73 Sec. 9 cl. 1 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

74 Sec. 13(6) UWG 1909.Google Scholar

75 Sec. 9 cl. 2 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

76 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 23.Google Scholar

77 Sec. 10 para. 1 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

78 Explanatory statement of the new law BT-Drs. 15/1487, 24.Google Scholar

79 Sec. 10 para. 2 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

80 Sec. 10 para. 2 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

81 Sec. 16 UWG 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

82 Sec. 263 StGB.Google Scholar

83 Sec. 17, 19 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

84 Sec. 18, 19 UWG 2004. Cf. sec. 17, 18, 20, 20a UWG of 1909.Google Scholar

85 Sec. 14 para. 1 UWG 2004. Cf. sec. 24 UWG of 1909.Google Scholar

86 Sec. 14 para. 2 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

87 Sec. 15 UWG 2004, cf. sec. 27a UWG of 1909.Google Scholar

88 See, e.g., Federation of German Consumer Organisations (vzbv), http://www.vzbv.de/start/-index.php?page=themen&bereichs_id=5&themen_id=24&mit_id=407&task=mit.Google Scholar

89 Zettel, Günter, Verbotstatbestände im neuen UWG, Monatsschrift des Deutschen Rechts 1099, 1102 (2004).Google Scholar

90 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 19.Google Scholar

91 EuGH GRUR Int. 1998, 795 – Gut Springenheide; EuGH GRUR Int. 1999, 345 – Sektkellerei Kessler; EuGH GRUR 2003, 533 (536) – Pippig Augenoptik/Hartlauer.Google Scholar

92 Federation of German Consumer Organisations (vzbv), http://www.vzbv.de/start/index.php?page-=themen&bereichs_id=5&themen_id=24&mit_id=407&task=mit.Google Scholar

93 See sec. 434 paras 1, 3 BGB.Google Scholar

94 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 14 f.Google Scholar

95 Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 22.Google Scholar

96 Astrid Stadler/Hans-W. Micklitz, Der Reformvorschlag der UWG-Novelle für eine Verbandsklage auf Gewinnabschöpfung, Wettbewerb in Recht und Praxis 559 (2003); Stefan Engels/Thomas H. Salomon, Vom Lauterkeitsrecht zum Verbraucherschutz – UWG-Reform 2003, WRP 32, 42 f. (2004).Google Scholar

97 Statement of the Bundesrat, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 34.Google Scholar

98 Statement of the Bundesrat, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 34 f.Google Scholar

99 Statement of the Bundesregierung, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 43.Google Scholar

100 Stefan Engels/Thomas H. Salomon, Vom Lauterkeitsrecht zum Verbraucherschutz – UWG-Reform 2003, Wettbewerb in Recht und Praxis 32, 43 (2004).Google Scholar

101 Astrid Stadler/Hans-W. Micklitz, Der Reformvorschlag der UWG-Novelle für eine Verbandsklage auf Gewinnabschöpfung, Wettbewerb in Recht und Praxis 559, 562 (2003); Günter Zettel, Das neue Gesetz gegen den unlauteren Wettbewerb, MDR 1040, 1043 (2004).Google Scholar

102 Sec. 7 para. 2 no. 2 UWG 2004.Google Scholar

103 Statement of the Bundesrat, BT-Drucks. 15/1487, 31 f.Google Scholar

104 Also see the current case law. See Explanatory statement of the new law, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 21. Statement of the Bundesregierung, BT-Drs. 15/1487, 42.Google Scholar

105 Explanatory statement of the new law BT-Drs. 15/1487, 21, 42.Google Scholar