Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62020CN0371

    Case C-371/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 7 August 2020 — Peek & Cloppenburg KG, represented by Peek & Cloppenburg Düsseldorf Komplementär B.V. v Peek & Cloppenburg KG, represented by Van Graaf Management GmbH

    OJ C 348, 19.10.2020, p. 9–9 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    19.10.2020   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 348/9

    Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 7 August 2020 — Peek & Cloppenburg KG, represented by Peek & Cloppenburg Düsseldorf Komplementär B.V. v Peek & Cloppenburg KG, represented by Van Graaf Management GmbH

    (Case C-371/20)

    (2020/C 348/13)

    Language of the case: German

    Referring court

    Bundesgerichtshof

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Appellant on a point of law: Peek & Cloppenburg KG, represented by the personally liable partner Peek & Cloppenburg Düsseldorf Komplementär B.V.

    Respondent in the appeal on a point of law: Peek & Cloppenburg KG, represented by the personally liable partner Van Graaf Management GmbH

    Questions referred

    1.

    		 Is there a ‘payment’ for product promotion within the meaning of the first sentence of point 11 of Annex I to Directive 2005/29/EC (1) only in the case where monetary consideration is provided for the use of editorial content in the media to promote a product, or does the term ‘payment’ cover every kind of consideration, irrespective of whether this consists of money, goods, services or assets of any other kind?

    2.

    		 Does the first sentence of point 11 of Annex I to Directive 2005/29/EC presuppose that the trader provides the media operator with a non-cash benefit as consideration for the use of editorial content and, if so, must such consideration also be assumed to be present in the case where the media operator reports on an advertisement organised in conjunction with a trader, where that trader has made image rights available to the media operator for the purposes of that report, both undertakings have contributed towards the costs and effort associated with that advertisement and the advertisement serves to promote sales of the products of both undertakings?

    (1)  Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Unfair Commercial Practices Directive) (OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22).

    Top