Cannabis
with a
Click.
Cannabis
with a
Click.
of
Can an online portal simply offer a treatment appointment with a cannabis doctor for headaches, migraines or sleep disorders? When does harmless information become prohibited drug advertising?What consequences does the ruling have for platform operators, doctors and pharmacies in the rapidly growing market for cannabis products?
What this case was about
The market for medicinal cannabis is booming. Since the legislator removed cannabis from the Narcotics Act at the beginning of April 2024, more and more online platforms have been advertising that they facilitate access to cannabis treatment. The Federal Court of Justice dealt with precisely such a business model. The platform operator in question arranged appointments for interested parties with cooperating doctors who can prescribe prescription cannabis products. On its website, it also listed the ailments for which such treatment is said to be helpful and also offered a button with which users could directly submit a treatment request.
The Wettbewerbszentrale saw this as prohibited advertising to the public for a prescription-only medicine and sued for an injunction. The Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main initially dismissed the action. The Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main overturned the decision and ordered the platform operator to cease and desist. The latter appealed against this decision.
Why German advertising law continues to apply here
The fact that cannabis has no longer been considered a narcotic since 01.04.2024 does not mean that advertising for it would be free. According to German drug advertising law , advertising for prescription drugs to the general public is still prohibited. The law serves to protect health. It is intended to prevent consumers from being tempted by suggestive advertising to self-medicate or to urge their doctor to prescribe a particular preparation even though it is not the best choice medically. This idea has nothing to do with the decriminalization of cannabis and, in the opinion of the Federal Court of Justice, continues to apply unchanged.
The decision of the Federal Court of Justice
The Federal Court of Justice has ruled Judgment of 26.03.2026 – Ref. I ZR 74/25 rejected the appeal by the platform operator and thus confirmed the ban. According to the federal judges, the presentation of symptoms with the subsequent booking option is not purely informative, but an advertising activity aimed at promoting the sale of prescription cannabis products. The overall view is decisive. Anyone who combines a list of indications such as chronic pain, migraines, depression, ADHD or sleep disorders with immediate access to a treatment request creates the impression in the reader that all they have to do is click on the button to get a prescription. This is exactly the situation that the legislator wanted to prevent.
In the case in dispute, the information provided by the defendant on the possible uses of medicinal cannabis meant that there was a risk that consumers would use such a product without medical supervision or misuse it for the named ailments or insist on its prescription when visiting a doctor.
The Senate also rejected the argument that there is no advertising because the prescription lies exclusively with the doctor. The fact that a doctor ultimately decides does not change the fact that the advertising is intended to persuade patients to request a prescription. Union law does not permit such circumvention of the ban, as the ban on advertising to the public would otherwise be null and void. Nor does it help the portal operator that it is not advertising a specific product from a specific manufacturer, but an entire product group. According to the case law of the Federal Court of Justice and the Court of Justice of the European Union, advertising for an indefinite number of prescription drugs can also be product-related and therefore fall within the scope of the advertising ban.
What this means for platforms, doctors and pharmacies
Operators of digital offerings in the healthcare sector must check their websites carefully. The mere mention of medical conditions in combination with a referral form is enough to cross the threshold of prohibited advertising to the public. Anyone wishing to entice patients with a prescription promise is outside the scope of what is permitted by law. On the other hand, neutral information by independent bodies that is not aimed at a specific sale remains permissible if no reference to a specific or customizable product can be identified.
Doctors should be aware that their cooperation with brokerage portals may also come under scrutiny if the advertising is too clearly aimed at encouraging the prescription of certain preparations. Pharmacies and pharmaceutical retailers must also carefully distinguish between permissible information and impermissible sales promotion in their public image. The decision shows that competition associations are keeping a close eye on this market and threatening cease and desist letters in the event of violations.
Conclusion
The ban on advertising prescription drugs to the public is intended to protect patients from having their demand determined by advertising messages instead of a medical diagnosis. According to the Federal Court of Justice, the legalization of cannabis as a recreational product must not lead to the medical variant becoming a lifestyle product.
Critically, however, it can be argued that the line between useful patient information and prohibited advertising is difficult to draw in individual cases. Platforms that want to provide serious information must expect considerable design effort.
Companies that provide such online offers should therefore have their offers legally checked in order to avoid unpleasant surprises.
We are happy to
advise you about
Competition law!
