When a free claim with additional charges may breach the UWG and how mandatory fees, delivery, options and the order path should be reviewed.
, Mag. Bernhard Brandauer, Rechtsanwalt
“Free”, “at no cost” and similar terms are powerful advertising claims. Consumers expect that no price is charged for the advertised product. If the order path nevertheless requires activation, handling or service fees, the claim may be prohibited under Austrian unfair competition law.
Item 20 of the Annex to the Austrian UWG covers describing a product as free or in equivalent terms while the consumer must bear further costs. Only costs that are unavoidable in responding to the commercial practice and collecting or receiving the goods are excepted.
Businesses and competitors must therefore examine more than the banner. The main claim, footnotes, landing page, basket, mandatory services and actual billing form one connected process that should be documented.
Item 20 belongs to the blacklist of commercial practices. The described practice is always unfair towards consumers. The factual review therefore focuses on the impression conveyed by the overall presentation and the costs the customer must actually bear.
The rule is not limited to the word “free”. “At no cost”, “zero euros” and an equivalent visual presentation may also communicate that no consideration is due for the advertised product. The internal name of a charge is less important than whether the customer must pay it to receive the offer.
A clearly priced independent add-on requires a different assessment from a compulsory charge revealed only at the final order step. The campaign must remain consistent from the first advertisement to the final cost summary.
The review path separates campaign approval, an active challenge and observed competitor advertising. You can securely send the selected information to the firm after the assessment.
The advertising claim, mandatory charges, order path, add-ons and actual billing belong in the same review.
This review path does not decide legality. It organises the facts needed for legal assessment.
List every payment required to receive or use the advertised offer. Separate unavoidable costs of responding to the promotion and collecting or receiving the goods from charges for the product, activation, handling or mandatory add-ons. Have the headline, qualifications and order path reviewed together.
Preserve the advertisement, landing page, basket, order confirmation and billing. Record which charges are mandatory and which services are genuinely optional. Do not amend the campaign before the challenged version has been preserved as evidence.
Record the complete claim, all visible qualifications, the steps leading to the price summary and every mandatory price component. Do not bypass access controls or place unnecessary orders. The actual overall presentation is central to the legal assessment.
The statutory text does not permit every incidental charge alongside a free claim. It refers only to unavoidable costs of responding to the commercial practice and collecting or receiving the goods. It does not provide a general route for shifting the product price into handling, activation or service fees.
For campaign approval, each charge should be linked to a specific service. If payment is required to receive or use the advertised product as intended, it should be assessed as part of the advertised overall offer. An internal accounting label does not change the customer’s impression.
The advertising claims self-check helps organise the claim, audience, evidence and visible qualifications. For free offers, the approval file should also include a complete cost matrix and the actual order path.
A voluntary add-on with its own price does not automatically make a free offer unlawful. The free main product must, however, be genuinely available without the add-on. Preselected options, obscure opt-outs or a technically compulsory bundle can undermine that separation.
A free trial should also make clear which service is provided without charge during the advertised period and what conditions apply to later payment. Separate contractual information or termination rules may also apply and require their own assessment. This UWG article remains limited to the specific free claim and the actual cost path.
The canonical German article on misleading commercial practices under section 2 UWG explains the general framework. This article focuses more narrowly on the special cost rule in item 20.
A qualification will not reliably correct a prominent free claim if it appears only after several clicks or in difficult to read text. Price components and conditions should appear where the claim influences the commercial decision. Mobile views, apps, marketplaces and printed material require separate review.
Before publication, businesses should document a real journey from the advertisement to the final cost summary. Different devices, sales channels and customer groups may matter. Technical or pricing changes require fresh approval because an earlier screenshot does not prove the current order logic.
Other verifiable claims have their own focus. The articles on market leadership claims and quality seals and certifications explain why each headline needs its own evidence and qualification review.
For an own campaign, keep the advertising version, approval record, cost matrix, product configuration and documented order journey in the same file. Add billing examples, technical changes, complaints and the response to any identified discrepancy.
For observed competitor advertising, preserve the complete advertisement, date, URL, visible qualifications and sequence of order steps. Isolated excerpts may create a different impression from the full campaign. Legal review must also establish who may bring a claim and which protective objective is appropriate.
The canonical German article on the UWG blacklist places all automatically prohibited consumer practices in context. This article remains limited to free advertising, unavoidable costs and mandatory additional charges.
Item 20 excepts only costs that are unavoidable in responding to the commercial practice and collecting or receiving the goods. Whether a particular charge falls within that wording depends on the actual service, amount, presentation and order path. Further product, activation or handling charges are not automatically permitted.
Not reliably. The overall presentation is decisive. A late or difficult to perceive notice may not adequately qualify a prominent free claim. The headline, qualifications and cost summary must be reviewed together.
Yes, a genuinely voluntary add-on can have its own price. The advertised free product must actually remain available without it. Preselection, technical compulsion and presentation in the order path are important to the distinction.
Organise the claim, audience, evidence and campaign status.
Assess the claim, evidence, repetition risk and possible protective objective.
The canonical German overview of automatically prohibited consumer practices.
The firm advises on advertising claims, injunctions and competition proceedings.
Topics
Give us a concise outline of the situation. We will clarify which documents are needed and which next step is appropriate.
Office
BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte GmbH Giselakai 51 5020 Salzburg Österreich
Phone
+43 662 6280000