{"id":68130,"date":"2019-08-13T13:10:35","date_gmt":"2019-08-13T11:10:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/?p=68130"},"modified":"2024-10-22T14:01:28","modified_gmt":"2024-10-22T12:01:28","slug":"amazon-appeals-against-temporary-injunction-reason-for-blocking-was-only-a-pretence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/magazine-en\/negotiation-strategy-process-tactics\/amazon-appeals-against-temporary-injunction-reason-for-blocking-was-only-a-pretence\/","title":{"rendered":"Amazon appeals against temporary injunction: Reason for blocking was only a pretence"},"content":{"rendered":"<figure id=\"attachment_47271\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-47271\" style=\"width: 481px\" class=\"wp-caption alignleft\"><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"wp-image-47271 size-full\" src=\"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/Pinnochio.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"481\" height=\"249\" \/><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-47271\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">\u00a9 easyclickshop &#8211; Fotolia.com<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<p>We had reported on this:<\/p>\n<h2>Temporary injunction against Amazon<\/h2>\n<p>On 26 June 2019, the Hildesheim Regional Court ruled in an interim injunction that Amazon must immediately lift the block on a seller account, restore deleted listings and immediately release any existing retained credit on the account:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/magazine-en\/negotiation-strategy-process-tactics\/amazon-seller-account-blocked-lg-hildesheim-issues-temporary-injunction-against-amazon\/\">Amazon seller account blocked: LG Hildesheim issues temporary injunction against Amazon<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2>Amazon thwarts enforcement of the court decision<\/h2>\n<p>Amazon then thwarted the enforcement of the injunction. Although they accepted the documents to be served, they did not document their receipt with a signature but only with a mere stamp. We reported here:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/magazine-en\/negotiation-strategy-process-tactics\/update-on-the-unauthorised-blocking-of-the-seller-account-amazon-thwarts-service-of-the-preliminary-injunction\/\">Update on the unauthorised blocking of the seller account: Amazon thwarts service of the preliminary injunction<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2>Amazon files an objection on almost 250 pages<\/h2>\n<p>In the meantime, not unexpectedly, Amazon has filed an appeal against the preliminary injunction &#8211; with almost 250 pages of attachments.<\/p>\n<p>It is interesting to note that the submission contained therein was apparently made in the blue without knowing the application (Amazon behauptet in der Widerspruchsschrift, dass diese nicht vorliege) and largely deals with formal arguments from the defence (Zust\u00e4ndigkeit, anwendbares Recht, etc.). The allegedly failed service is also mentioned.<\/p>\n<h2>Amazon admits that the reason for the cancellation was only a pretext<\/h2>\n<p>In contrast, the comments on the specific reason for the cancellation are limited to a few lines, in which it is not even disputed that the reason previously given for blocking the applicant, namely the \u2018manipulation of product reviews\u2019, never actually existed.<\/p>\n<p>Amazon thus admits in the course of the court proceedings that &#8211; always an open secret in retail circles &#8211; companies are apparently taken into a kind of \u2018clan custody\u2019 as soon as any internal personnel connections to an unpleasant other company become known. But that&#8217;s not all. As the present case shows, Amazon does not inform the retailers concerned of this, but apparently blocks them under a pretext.<\/p>\n<p>This is an aspect that is not only of interest to the court in this case, but should also help other retailers in legal proceedings against Amazon&#8217;s measures. This particular type of \u2018data processing\u2019 could also be interesting from an antitrust law perspective with regard to the possible abuse of a dominant market position. Amazon has just reached an agreement with the German Federal Cartel Office to \u2018behave\u2019 better in future in order to avoid fines. We reported here:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/magazine-en\/media-law-personal-rights\/eu-prueft-datennutzung-von-amazon-verdacht-auf-marktmissbrauch\/\">EU investigates Amazon&#8217;s use of data: Suspicion of market abuse<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2>UPDATE 27.8.2019<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/magazine-en\/copyright-design-law\/amazon-kontosperrung-muendliche-verhandlung-2\/\">Amazon account blocking: Hildesheim Regional Court sets date for hearing on 6 September 2019<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2>UPDATE 4.9.2019<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/magazine-en\/negotiation-strategy-process-tactics\/first-success-before-the-hildesheim-regional-court-amazon-releases-credit-balance-of-almost-e30000-shortly-before-the-hearing\/\">First success before the Hildesheim Regional Court: Amazon releases credit balance of almost \u20ac30,000 shortly before the hearing<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2>UPDATE 9.9.2019<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/magazine-en\/copyright-design-law\/lg-hildesheim-kippt-ev\/\">Hildesheim Regional Court overturns injunction against Amazon, emphasises \u2018significant market power\u2019 of the group<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><em>(Disclosure: Our law firm represents the applicant).<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>We had reported on this: Temporary injunction against Amazon On 26 June 2019, the Hildesheim Regional Court ruled in an interim injunction that Amazon must immediately lift the block on a seller account, restore deleted listings and immediately release any existing retained credit on the account: Amazon seller account blocked: LG Hildesheim issues temporary injunction [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":47272,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"content-type":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[19441,19455],"tags":[20294,20509,20510,20517,20518],"class_list":["post-68130","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-negotiation-strategy-process-tactics","category-competition-law-antitrust-law","tag-temporary-injunction","tag-account-blocking","tag-amazon-en","tag-kinship","tag-contradiction"],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68130","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=68130"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68130\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":68131,"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68130\/revisions\/68131"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/47272"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68130"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68130"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lhr-law.de\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68130"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}