Professional Law

Decision of OVG NRW (Higher Administrative Court NRW) of 02/08/2011, file number: 13 B 1659/10

Advertising with medical foot care is reserved only for podiatrists. A masseuse who advertises with such service acts anti-competitively if he has no formation as podiatrist. The layman cannot identify this service only as part of the work of the masseuse but expects a special qualification within the range of the foot care. Such advertising represents a misleading of the patient.

Judgement of BGH (Supreme Court) of 01/12/2010, file number: I ZR 55/08

A dentist who makes on an Internet platform a counteroffer to the colleague’s treatment and cost plan that the patient has published there, is not contrary to the question of fairness of the legal profession either to the professional standards. In case that this dentist makes a treatment contract with the patient and he pays a part of his fee in return for the use of the virtual marketplace, this is not an impermissible fee promise for the location of patients. Accordingly, the operator of the internet platform does not act anti-competitively.

Judgement of BGH (Federal Supreme Court) of 09/07/2009, file number: I ZR 13/07

The wish of the patient to receive the complete assistance from the same hand is not enough to justify the reference to a certain optician or the delivery and adaptation of the glasses by the ophthalmologist. Hence, a reference to a certain optician is anticompetitive.

Press release of BGH (Federal Supreme Court) of 09/07/2009, file number: I ZR 13/07

The Federal Court of Justice has decided in a current judgement that ophthalmologists might co-operate only with an optician and offer his frames if this “are a component of the necessary medical therapy because of its specific features”. Otherwise, such an action would infringe against the Medical Association's professional code of conduct   and would be anticompetitive.

Judgement of LG Köln (Regional Court Cologne) of 03/02/2009, file number: 33 O 353/08

In case lawyers’ quality was checked, this quality should be clearly recognisable on the conferred certificate. The advertising of such certificate is delusive, even if it suggests the criteria is objective, while actually, it is installed in the testing centre’s sole discretion. 

Judgement of LG Paderborn (Regional Court Paderborn) of 24/02/2009, file number: 7 O 67/06

If a service company is promoted in "Das Örtliche", is to be assumed that this company enterprise is settled in the searched place or town. Nevertheless, misdirection is not given in case the searched company moves after the phone book editorial deadline, which means it is still promoted under its old address.