LG Koblenz: Inadmissible demand for confirmation of termination by telephone

Insight into the decision of the Koblenz Regional Court

In its judgment of 27.02.2024 (Ref.: 11 O 12/23), the Regional Court of Koblenz dealt with a relevant aspect in the area of online consumer protection by examining the practice of confirming notices of termination given online by telephone. Although this ruling does not represent a significant legal innovation, it provides clear guidance regarding the design of termination processes in digital business transactions. It underlines the importance of a transparent and consumer-friendly approach to online termination procedures. The decision shows that additional requirements, such as telephone confirmation, can be seen as an obstacle to effective and uncomplicated termination. In this context, the ruling serves as a kind of guide for companies to optimize their processes in line with the expectations of the digital age and legal requirements.

Facts

In the underlying case, a consumer protection association took legal action against a company that demanded a telephone confirmation for the validity of a termination notice issued online. The plaintiff was of the opinion that such a demand not only constituted an unnecessary hurdle, but also misled the consumer about his right to terminate the contract within the meaning of the UWG. The company’s approach is seen as an example of challenges in the digital business world, where processes are often complicated by additional requirements. The case highlights how important it is for companies to make termination procedures simple, clear and without unnecessary obstacles. It shows that in the course of digitalization, the protection of consumer rights, especially with regard to the termination of contractual relationships, plays an essential role.

Decision of the Koblenz Regional Court

In its decision, the Koblenz Regional Court found that the company had violated the Unfair Competition Act (UWG) by requiring its customers to confirm online cancellations by telephone. The court judged this practice to be misleading, as it gave a false impression of the legal requirements for termination. The ruling emphasized that the authentication of a terminating party can also be carried out by less restrictive means, such as confirmation by e-mail. This underlines the need for companies to make termination processes simple and consumer-friendly in order to comply with the principles of fair and transparent business transactions. Although the Koblenz Regional Court’s ruling does not create a new legal situation, it does emphasize the importance of clear and uncomplicated termination procedures in digital business transactions. It reminds companies that compliance with consumer protection regulations is essential for a fair business environment and that termination processes must not be made unnecessarily difficult. The decision shows that companies must take both practical and legal considerations into account when designing their business processes. This not only serves to protect consumers, but also promotes a transparent and trustworthy business relationship between companies and customers.

Conclusion

The judgment of the Koblenz Regional Court provides important insights for companies in online business transactions. It highlights the need to design termination processes in line with legal requirements and in the interests of consumer friendliness. Companies are required to review their practices and ensure that they are not only efficient but also legally compliant.