Liability
for unlawful
reviews.
Liability
for unlawful
reviews.
from
Courts rule on customer reviews on company websites. The Regional Courts of Bochum and Frankfurt am Main have ruled in two independent proceedings that companies must accept responsibility for statements made in published customer reviews and are therefore liable under competition law.
Are companies responsible for statements within
customer reviews?
Yes, say the Regional Court of Bochum in its judgment of 21.11.2024 – file number 14 O 65/24 and the Regional Court of Frankfurt a.M.
in its judgment of 20.12.2024 – file number 3-08 O 38/22 in two decisions issued in quick succession in November and December 2024.
Customers describe product as digestible
The Bochum Regional Court examined the question of whether the publication of customer reviews containing anti-competitive statements is anti-competitive if the company has previously issued a cease-and-desist declaration with a penalty clause in relation to these statements. Specifically, the company had previously advertised various types of coffee with the claims “digestible” and “easy on the stomach”. After receiving a cease and desist letter for this, it declared that it would refrain from making such claims in future. Customer reviews were reproduced on the company’s website in the form of a review band at the bottom of the offer page for individual items. In various reviews, individual customers had described the products as “wholesome”. A trade association demanded that the company remove these reviews in view of the cease-and-desist declaration. The company refused. Wrongly, according to the Bochum Regional Court.
Since the defendant has created an opportunity to present these ratings and uses them for advertising purposes, these infringements are also attributable to it
The use of third-party assessment tools is not relevant
The company had argued that the customer reviews on the website were not initiated by its own employees. As the reviews were posted via a third-party review tool, the company had no influence on the content of the entries and was not in a position to remove or change reviews. According to the company, the customers who use the review tool are solely responsible for the content of the posts. Their statements are protected by the freedom of expression.
The Bochum Regional Court did not find this convincing. It stated that the company adopted the customers’ statements as its own for advertising purposes, meaning that they were attributable to it. It cited several reasons for this. Firstly, the reviews come from verified customers, meaning that the reviews are of particular importance for future customers. Secondly, the reviews have a deliberately advertising character due to the specific design of the website, which displays the reviews specifically when individual products are called up. In this way, the company not only gains information, but also wants to advertise its products by making the reviews public and thus also provide decision-making support for other customers.
Company must influence third parties or allow statements to be attributed to it
The court countered the company’s objections by stating that the company cannot avoid its responsibility for the advertising it places by using a tool that runs via another provider. Rather, the company must exert influence on the service provider that manages this tool so that it removes ratings that are problematic with regard to cease and desist obligations. If it fails to do so, it must accept responsibility for the statements.
LG Frankfurt a.M. also attributes customer reviews to
The Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main came to a similar conclusion (judgment of 20.12.2024, ref. 3-08 O 38/22) with regard to the question to be decided as to whether misleading statements in customer reviews are attributable to the company. Specifically, a cosmetics provider had offered a hair tincture with mandarin extract. The company advertised that the product would reduce gray hair. It did not provide any evidence for this claim. However, customer reviews supported this. The reviews contained statements such as:
My hair got a beautiful shade … no more roots from coloring.
I use (…) almost every morning. The effect is visible after a few weeks. I will no longer dye my hair .
A consumer protection association considered this to be misleading advertising and took legal action against the company. As it turned out, this was the law.
Statements in customer reviews are attributable to the defendant if it has made the statements its own […]
The Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main came to the conclusion that the claim that the product reduced gray hair was not substantiated and was therefore misleading. This was also true in light of the fact that a generous standard was applied in this regard, according to which the statement must at least be supported by sufficient and verifiable evidence without the need for scientific proof as is required for health claims.
Company adopts statement content as its own
The court did not recognize sufficient or verifiable evidence. As a result, it also considered the published customer reviews to be misleading advertising, as the company had adopted the content of the customer reviews as its own through the design of the website. The court differentiated between reviews on online trading platforms and reviews on the company’s own website. The court came to the conclusion that the company deliberately wanted to strengthen trust in the product by highlighting the reviews on its own website. Therefore, the company must also assume full responsibility for the content of the statements in these customer reviews.
Conclusion
Companies cannot evade their responsibility for statements made by customers in published customer reviews by making a blanket reference to the fact that these are third-party statements. Insofar as companies display customer reviews at product level, they must regularly accept responsibility for the content of the statements.
The far-reaching significance of this is obvious. Companies must constantly monitor the reviews they publish and check them for anti-competitive content if they do not want to run the risk of receiving costly cease and desist letters. It is therefore necessary to weigh up whether the advantages of displaying reviews outweigh the potential disadvantages. In particular, providers in areas where strict advertising regulations apply – such as pharmaceutical advertising, health advertising or food advertising – are well advised to take legal precautions at an early stage and ensure that their marketing strategy is legally compliant.
We are happy to
advise you about
Competition law!
