According to the ECJ, if someone publishes several sales advertisements on a website, this does not automatically establish the activity as a “trader”.

This can sometimes have a massive impact on questions of the applicability of trademark law or competition law.

In the underlying case, a consumer purchased a used wristwatch on an online platform. After discovering that the watch did not have the characteristics stated in the sale advertisement, the consumer informed the seller that he wished to cancel the contract. Ms. Evelina Kamenova, the seller, refused to take back the goods for a refund. Therefore, the consumer filed a complaint with the Bulgarian Consumer Protection Commission. After a query on the online platform in question, KfV found that on December 10, 2014, eight ads for sale of various goods were still published on this website by Ms. Kamenova under the pseudonym “eveto-ZZ.”

The authority issued a fine due to the violation of numerous consumer protection standards, which, similar to Germany, only oblige traders.

This problem also exists in Germany and has certainly affected sellers on Ebay in the past who, for example, were liquidating apartments, etc., selling a larger quantity of items, some of the same type.

The current ECJ ruling could lead to a change in this view, as in its ruling it first stated that for a company to be classified as a “trader” within the meaning of 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 (OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22), it is necessary that the person concerned acts “in the course of his trade, business, craft or profession” or in the name or on behalf of the trader. The Court then clarified that the meaning and significance of the term “trader” must be determined by reference to the term “consumer,” which denotes anyone not engaged in a trade or profession.

Thus, in order to classify the activity at issue as a “commercial practice,” the national court would have to consider whether, first, that activity emanates from a “trader” and, second, constitutes an act, omission, course of conduct, statement or commercial communication “directly related to the promotion, sale or supply of a product to consumers.”

Therefore, the Court concluded that a natural person who simultaneously publishes a series of advertisements offering new and used goods for sale on a website is to be classified as a “trader” and such activity constitutes a “commercial practice” only if that person is acting within the scope of his or her trade, craft or profession.