By Arno Lampmann · Published
MagazinneuAnyone unpacking a battery storage unit for a balcony solar system or a solar panel today will often find little more than a QR code in the box. The operating manual, the safety information and the declaration of conformity are somewhere on the internet.
Modern convenience or simply unlawful? The Düsseldorf Regional Court has given a clear answer, and not every supplier will like it.
At the request of a balcony solar supplier represented by us, the Düsseldorf Regional Court (Landgericht Düsseldorf) has issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting a competitor from selling Wi-Fi-enabled battery storage units and photovoltaic modules without enclosing the documents required by law (order of 4 November 2026, case no. 37 O 99/26). In the view of the 7th Chamber for Commercial Matters, a QR code instead of an operating manual is not sufficient, and neither is a reference to a download area. The injunction was issued without an oral hearing and is not yet final; the respondent may lodge an objection.
QR code instead of an operating manual: what was in the box and what was not
In September 2026 our client made two test purchases from the competitor: a battery storage unit for balcony solar systems that connects to the home network via Wi-Fi, and a standard 500-watt solar module. Both arrived at the beginning of October. The storage unit came without a copy of the EU declaration of conformity, without information on the frequency band and transmission power, and without safety information in German.
The solar module lacked an operating manual and safety information in German. The packaging did at least bear a QR code from which the buyer could download the documents. For the storage unit, too, the competitor referred to its download area, accessible via a link or QR code.
The competitor responded to the warning letter by filing a protective letter (Schutzschrift) with the court, arguing that the information online was sufficient and that our client was acting abusively. The court read the protective letter and issued the injunction anyway.
Why a download link is not “enclosed”
The German Radio Equipment Act (Funkanlagengesetz, FuAG) and the First Ordinance to the German Product Safety Act (1. ProdSV) require certain information to be enclosed with the product. According to the Düsseldorf court, enclosing means that the supplier delivers the information to the customer, for example on paper, on a data carrier or, at most, by e-mail. A QR code that requires customers to obtain the documents themselves is the opposite.
A battery storage unit with a Wi-Fi module is, legally speaking, radio equipment. Under Section 20 FuAG, which implements the EU Radio Equipment Directive 2014/53/EU, every piece of radio equipment must be accompanied by instructions and safety information (subsection 1), a copy of the EU declaration of conformity (subsection 2) and information on the frequency band and maximum transmission power (subsection 3). The court also relies on the structure of the provision, and convincingly so: only for the simplified declaration of conformity does Section 20(2) FuAG expressly allow an internet address where the full text can be found. Where the legislator wanted to permit a reference to the internet, it said so.
The solar module is governed by the 1. ProdSV, which implements the EU Low Voltage Directive. According to its rating plate, the module is designed for a maximum system voltage of 1,500 V DC and therefore falls within its scope. Under Section 8(3) of the 1. ProdSV, the operating manual and safety information must be enclosed in German, and for the same reasons a QR code on the box is not enough. For devices that laypeople mount on their own balcony and connect to the household grid, this is hardly a mere formality.
Both sets of rules protect market participants and implement EU law. Infringements are therefore unfair under Section 3a of the German Act against Unfair Competition (UWG) and can be pursued by competitors under Section 8 UWG. Incidentally, changing the packaging in the meantime does not get a supplier off the hook: according to the order, the risk of repetition does not disappear merely because the business practice has changed.
Is it abusive to challenge several infringements at once?
No, at least not as such. The Düsseldorf court found no abuse within the meaning of Section 8c UWG, because the claims concerned two different products and, for the storage unit, three infringements of different provisions. The position would be different if the same infringement were asserted separately for a large number of similar products.
The competitor had relied on another case before the Düsseldorf Regional Court in which exactly that had happened. The chamber drew the distinction clearly. Given the safety relevance of the infringements, it also did not consider the amounts in dispute stated in the warning letter excessive, and itself set the value of the proceedings at EUR 71,500.
Urgency: no duty to make test purchases in advance
The order is also of interest on the question of urgency. The competitor apparently sought to argue that our client could have known about similar infringements earlier. The court held that knowledge of infringements relating to certain products does not imply knowledge of infringements relating to other products.
According to the order, a competitor is not required to carry out immediate test purchases across the entire range in order to detect similar infringements. The statutory presumption of urgency under Section 12(1) UWG was therefore not rebutted. This is a useful clarification in practice, as the objection that the applicant has undermined its own urgency is part of every respondent’s standard repertoire.
Injunction without a hearing despite a protective letter
Since the case law of the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht, BVerfG) on procedural equality of arms, German courts explain more carefully why they decide without an oral hearing. The Düsseldorf court relies on the broad discretion the BVerfG grants the courts when assessing whether there is an urgent case within the meaning of Section 937(2) of the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) (BVerfG, order of 12 March 2024, case no. 1 BvR 605/24, paras. 16 et seq.).
Because the chamber is burdened with numerous urgent proceedings, a hearing would have been delayed by several weeks, and the lay commercial judges are generally only available on hearing days. The presiding judge therefore decided alone (Section 944 ZPO). The court considered the right to be heard to be safeguarded by the warning letter and by taking the protective letter into account, a result we expressly welcome in light of our experience with procedural hurdles in urgent proceedings (in German).
What manufacturers and retailers should check now
The decision is not limited to balcony solar systems. Every device with Wi-Fi or Bluetooth is radio equipment, and every electrical product in the low-voltage range is subject to the 1. ProdSV. Anyone selling such products in Germany should note the following:
- Instructions and safety information in German belong in the box, not just online.
- Radio equipment must be accompanied by the declaration of conformity (or the simplified version with an internet address) and the information on frequency band and transmission power.
- Retailers and importers should open deliveries from their manufacturers on a sample basis and document the contents, as they too must check that the documents are enclosed.
- Anyone who receives a warning letter does not remove the risk of repetition by quietly changing the packaging, but only by signing a cease-and-desist declaration with a penalty clause.
From LHR practice
Product law has long been a sharp instrument in the competition for balcony solar customers. For one client we obtained a ban before the Düsseldorf Regional Court within a few days against a solar storage unit sold without battery registration (in German); we have also reported on advertising with an alleged EU certification (in German).
One may regard the QR code as the more modern solution, and some newer EU regulations are moving in that direction. For radio equipment and low-voltage devices, however, the order makes clear that the supplier must deliver the information, and anyone trying to discharge that duty with a printed code is saving in the wrong place.
Frequently asked questions about QR codes and operating manuals
May I provide the operating manual via QR code only?
Not for radio equipment and low-voltage electrical products, according to the Düsseldorf Regional Court. Instructions and safety information must be enclosed with the product, meaning supplied by the seller. A QR code that leaves buyers to download the documents themselves does not fulfil this obligation.
Is a battery storage unit with Wi-Fi radio equipment?
Yes. As soon as a device emits radio waves, for example via a Wi-Fi or Bluetooth module, the German Radio Equipment Act applies. Among other things, the declaration of conformity and information on frequency band and maximum transmission power must then be enclosed.
Is a simplified declaration of conformity with a link sufficient?
Yes, this is the only exception expressly provided for in Section 20(2) FuAG. The simplified declaration itself must still be enclosed and must state the internet address where the full text is available. The exception does not extend to instructions, safety information or radio data.
Can competitors take action over missing product documents?
Yes. The provisions of the FuAG and the 1. ProdSV regulate market conduct, and infringing them is unfair under Section 3a UWG. Competitors can demand that the practice stops and, if necessary, apply for a preliminary injunction.
Does a competitor have to test the whole range before applying for an injunction?
No. According to the Düsseldorf court, knowledge of infringements relating to one product does not imply knowledge regarding other products. Discovering further infringements later does not cost the applicant its urgency.
Is a competitor shipping without instructions, or have you received a warning letter over missing product documents?
We review the test purchase, packaging and documents and tell you whether action is worthwhile or how to defend yourself. You will usually receive an initial assessment within 24 hours.
Further information
- Product safety and GPSR (in German)
- Product safety on Amazon (in German)
- Our fields of activity (in German)
- Our successes (in German)
Bild: LHR