{"id":67650,"date":"2015-01-05T06:55:56","date_gmt":"2015-01-05T04:55:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/?p=67650"},"modified":"2024-10-22T15:05:33","modified_gmt":"2024-10-22T13:05:33","slug":"lhr-obtains-preliminary-injunction-against-stiftung-warentest-before-munich-higher-regional-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/magazine-en\/lhr-obtains-preliminary-injunction-against-stiftung-warentest-before-munich-higher-regional-court\/","title":{"rendered":"LHR obtains preliminary injunction against Stiftung Warentest before Munich Higher Regional Court"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"mangelhaft\"At the request of Lampmann, Haberkamm & Rosenbaum Rechtsanw\u00e4lte (LHR), the Munich Higher Regional Court (OLG M\u00fcnchen, Urteil v. 18.12.2014, Az. 18 W 2116\/14<\/a>) issued a temporary injunction against Stiftung Warentest.<\/p>\n

This prohibits the foundation from including a company in a warning list for allegedly dubious investments with the inaccurate indication that the persons responsible are being investigated by the public prosecutor’s office.<\/p>\n

In the event of non-compliance, a fine of up to \u20ac 250,000 or up to six months’ imprisonment may be imposed.<\/p>\n

The judgment is final. However, a final decision is reserved for the main proceedings. Unless Stiftung Warentest would recognize the ruling as a final regulation.<\/p>\n

After Stiftung Warentest had already been put in its place by the Munich courts in the high-profile \u201cchocolate dispute\u201d with Ritter Sport<\/a> in January 2014 and September 2014 respectively, the judges at Munich Higher Regional Court once again certified that Stiftung Warentest had engaged in unlawful reporting. At the hearing, the chairman of the senate left no doubt that Stiftung Warentest had not even begun to comply with its duty of care with the statement in question.<\/p>\n

The Munich Higher Regional Court thus corrected the first-instance decision of the Munich I Regional Court and agreed with our client that the false allegations interfered with our client’s right to privacy and its established and exercised business operations and must therefore be refrained from.<\/p>\n

Lawyer Arno Lampmann from the law firm LHR:<\/p>\n

\u201cIn view of the clear factual and legal situation, it is incomprehensible why the Munich I Regional Court did not issue the ban we requested without delay. In the name of consumer protection, there is of course no objection to factually justified criticism, particularly in the sensitive area of investment, even if a \u201cpoor\u201d or a \u201cwarning\u201d from Stiftung Warentest, as in the Ritter Sport case, can have serious consequences for the companies. However, this is precisely why inadequate research and untrue claims must be stopped at all costs.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

(la)<\/p>\n

(Image: \u00a9 CG<\/span><\/span>\u2013 Fotolia.com)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

At the request of Lampmann, Haberkamm & Rosenbaum Rechtsanw\u00e4lte (LHR), the Munich Higher Regional Court (OLG M\u00fcnchen, Urteil v. 18.12.2014, Az. 18 W 2116\/14) issued a temporary injunction against Stiftung Warentest. This prohibits the foundation from including a company in a warning list for allegedly dubious investments with the inaccurate indication that the persons responsible […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":34413,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"content-type":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[19449,19453,19474],"tags":[20316,20317,20318,20319],"class_list":["post-67650","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-magazine-en","category-media-law-personal-rights","category-press-releases","tag-interim-injunction","tag-olg-munich","tag-ritter-sport-en","tag-stiftung-warenstest-en"],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67650","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=67650"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67650\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":67652,"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67650\/revisions\/67652"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/34413"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67650"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67650"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67650"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}