Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62013CA0052

    Case C-52/13: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 13 March 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Posteshop SpA — Divisione Franchising Kipoint v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri (Request for a preliminary ruling  — Directive 2006/114/EC  — Concepts of ‘misleading advertising’ and ‘comparative advertising’   — National legislation providing that misleading advertising and unlawful comparative advertising are two separate unlawful acts)

    OJ C 135, 5.5.2014, p. 13–14 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    5.5.2014   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 135/13


    Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 13 March 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Posteshop SpA — Divisione Franchising Kipoint v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri

    (Case C-52/13) (1)

    ((Request for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2006/114/EC - Concepts of ‘misleading advertising’ and ‘comparative advertising’ - National legislation providing that misleading advertising and unlawful comparative advertising are two separate unlawful acts))

    2014/C 135/14

    Language of the case: Italian

    Referring court

    Consiglio di Stato

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Applicant: Posteshop SpA — Divisione Franchising Kipoint

    Defendants: Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato, Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri

    Interveners: Cg srl, Tacoma srl

    Re:

    Request for a preliminary ruling — Consiglio di Stato — Interpretation of Directive 2006/114/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 concerning misleading and comparative advertising (OJ 2006 L 376, p. 21) — Unfair business practices between traders — Concept of ‘misleading advertising and comparative advertising’ — National legislation which not only prohibits advertising that is at the same time misleading and based on unlawful comparison but also provides that misleading advertising and comparative advertising are two separate offences.

    Operative part of the judgment

    With regard to the protection afforded to traders, Directive 2006/114/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 concerning misleading and comparative advertising is to be interpreted as referring to misleading advertising and unlawful comparative advertising as two independent infringements and to the effect that, in order to prohibit and penalise misleading advertising, it is not necessary that that latter at the same time should constitute unlawful comparative advertising.


    (1)  OJ C 123, 27.4.2013.


    Top