CJEU on advertisement comparing prices of goods sold in shops with different sizes or formats

22-02-2017 Print this page
IPPT20170208, CJEU, Carrefour v ITM

ADVERTISING LAW

 

Advertising comparing the prices of goods sold in shops having different sizes or formats, is liable to be unlawful, where those shops are part of retail chains each of which includes a range of shops having different sizes or formats and where the advertiser compares the prices charged in shops having larger sizes or formats in its retail chain with those displayed in shops having smaller sizes or formats in the retail chains of competitors unless consumers are informed clearly and in the advertisement itself that the comparison was made between the prices charged in shops in the advertiser’s retail chain having larger sizes or formats and those indicated in the shops of competing retail chains having smaller sizes or formats.

 

"40. Having regard to all of the foregoing considerations, the answer to the questions referred is as follows:  Article 4(a) and (c) of Directive 2006/114, read in conjunction with Article 7(1) to (3) of Directive 2005/29, must be interpreted as meaning that advertising, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which compares the prices of products sold in shops having different sizes or formats, where those shops are part of retail chains each of which includes a range of shops having different sizes or formats and where the advertiser compares the prices charged in shops having larger sizes or formats in its retail chain with those displayed in shops with smaller sizes or formats in the retail chains of competitors, is liable to be unlawful, within the meaning of Article 4(a) and (c) of Directive 2006/114, unless consumers are informed clearly and in the advertisement itself that the comparison was made between the prices charged in shops in the advertiser’s retail chain having larger sizes or formats and those indicated in the shops of competing retail chains having smaller sizes or formats."

 

Referring court needs to ascertain whether in the case in the main proceedings, the advertising at issue satisfies the objective comparison requirement and/or is misleading by taking into consideration the average consumer of the products in question who is reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect and by taking into account the information contained in that advertising.

 

"40. It is for the referring court, in order to assess the lawfulness of such advertising, to ascertain whether, in the case in the main proceedings, in the light of the circumstances of the present case, the advertising at issue satisfies the objective comparison requirement and/or is misleading, first, by taking into consideration the average consumer of the products in question who is reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect and, secondly, by taking into account the information contained in that advertising, in particular the information concerning the shops in the advertiser’s retail chain and those in the retail chains of competitors whose prices have been compared and, more generally, all of the elements in that advertising."

 

IPPT20170208, CJEU, Carrefour v ITM

 

C-562/15 -  ECLI:EU:C:2017:95