Background of the Case
In a significant ruling (5 U 25/233), the Higher Regional Court of Hamburg addressed the deletion of internet reviews. The case involved two companies. These companies had objected to and facilitated the deletion of negative internet reviews for clients. Crucially, they did so without a license to practice law or permission under the Legal Services Act.
Legal Classification of Internet Review Deletion
Core of the Judgment: Legal Services Requirement
The court clarified that objecting to customer reviews, when based on legal grounds, constitutes a legal service requiring a license. Such activities are exclusively reserved for lawyers. Individuals without appropriate legal qualifications may not perform them.
Complaints about ratings demand a detailed legal examination of each individual case. This involves precise analysis and application of relevant legal provisions to specific facts. It goes far beyond a general or schematic application of legal norms.
Detailed Legal Examination is Crucial
The court emphasized that sound legal knowledge is essential for such an examination. This knowledge is needed to correctly assess the legal scope and consequences of each review. Therefore, only qualified legal professionals are authorized to provide these services.
The Permissible Role of a Messenger in Review Disputes
The Higher Regional Court of Hamburg's ruling draws a significant distinction regarding the role of messenger activity in objecting to internet reviews. It explicitly states that a service in the area of review complaints is permissible only if strictly limited to a messenger activity. In this scenario, the reason for the review's removal must come directly from the customer.
Distinguishing Messenger Activity from Legal Services
This specific form of messenger activity, where a service provider merely transmits reasons formulated by the client, does not fall under the category of legal services requiring a license. The court emphasizes that pure messenger activity is clearly distinct from licensed legal services. Here, the service provider acts solely as a mediator of the client’s concerns, not as a legal advisor or auditor.
This activity does not require any legal assessment or interpretation by the service provider. Instead, the customer's provided justification is forwarded to the rating portals without changes or additional legal assessments.
Ensuring Legal Compliance for Companies
The ruling also highlights the necessity for companies wishing to challenge and object to reviews to engage legal expertise. It clarifies the protective function of the Legal Services Act for legal transactions and the legal system. This prevents the provision of unqualified legal services.
For companies, this means adapting their services accordingly. Independent legal justifications or examinations are not permitted without the required authorization. However, they can act as a messenger by forwarding unchanged reasons provided by the customer to rating portals. This helps to avoid unauthorized legal services.
Conclusion and Implications
The Higher Regional Court of Hamburg’s ruling sends a clear signal for the protection of legal services. It underscores the importance of legal professionalism. The judgment clarifies the decisive boundary between licensed legal services and permissible messenger activities.
Companies operating in this sector must ensure they do not provide unauthorized legal services through independent legal audits or reasoning. Conversely, the role of a messenger, who merely forwards arguments originating from the customer, remains a permissible practice.