Anwalt Deutschland Fachanwalt deutsch German Lawyer Germany English language Attorney-at-law English Lawyer germany french advocat francais allemagne French Attorney in Germany spanish language abogado alemania Spanish Attorney/ Lawyer in Germany Italian language avvocatto germania Italian Lawyer/ Attorney Germany Portuguese language advogado Alemanha Portuguese Polish speaking Lawyer/ Attorney in Germany adwokat Niemcy Polish Japanese speaking Lawyer/ Attorney in Germany Bengoshi Doitsu Japanese Attorney/ Lawyer Vietnamese language luat su Vietnamese Korean speaking lawyer/ attorney in Germany, Europe Korean Chinese language Lawyer/ Attorney in Germany/ Europe Chinese Lawyer/ Attorney russian speaking advokat Germaniya Russian

 

Attorney-at-Law Michael Horak, graduate engineer (Electrical Engineering), LL.M. (European Law)  | Julia Ziegeler, Attorney-at-law  | Attorney Umberg, LL.M., M.A.  | Lisa Schwerdt, Attorney-at-law  | Ansgar Kluge, Attorney-at-law  | Andree Eckhard, Patent Attorney  | Katharina Gitmann, Lawyer  | Karoline Behrend, Lawyer  | Johanna Müller, Patent Attorney

horak.
Attorneys at law

Overview   Practice   IP Law   Patent Law   Trademark Law   Law Office   Trademark Application   Patent filer   Sample Texts   German Acts   Court Rulings   Contact   Imprint   Links 
ip attorney germany lawyer attorney law office germany german law european law patent law design law trademark law copyright law german law ip specialist media law music law film law event law entertainment law contracts license agreement draft contract under german law  hannover prosecution infringement patent trade name copyright reseller contract attorney patent law  utility model law unfair competition law anti trust lawyer
file trdaemark application patent application design application lawyer patent trademark attorney trademark searches similiarity search opposition file an infingement suit germany german attorney ip specialist copyright specialist food law plant law patent lawyer domain law internet law it law computer law

patents-trademarks-copyright-europe law lawyer german law german lawyer german attorney trade mark law patent law utility model law design law

ip-lawyer it lawyer attorney for patents trade specialist ip attorney  marks germany european lawyer trademark european community mark ct ect law europen patent office germany representation

ohim euipo representative german patent office munich lawyer germany ip attorney patent lawyer trademark lawyer patent attorney german patent attorney epo eurpean patent office reprsentation law firm european patent german patent austrian patent office intellectual property design lawyer copyright law trademark law patent attorney trademark attorney design attorney

... Start ... Overview ... Court Rulings ... Competition law ... OLG-Celle-anwalt-hannover-de
Start
BGH-answer-obligation
BGH-Handy for 0
BVerfG-Benetton
OLG-Celle-anwalt-hannover-de


horak
.
Attorneys at Law
Lawyers
Patent Attorneys
Design Attorneys
Trademark Attorneys

Georgstr. 48 · 30159 Hannover · Germany
Fon +49.511.357356.0 · Fax +49.511.357356.29
horak@iprecht.de Anwalt Deutschland Fachanwalt deutsch
deutsch Lawyer Germany English language Attorney-at-law english

 

horak.
Lawyers Hannover (Main Office)
Georgstr. 48
30159 Hannover
Germany

Tel +49.511/357356-0
Fax +49.511/357356-29
hannover@iprecht.de

 

horak.
Lawyers Munich
Landshuter Allee 8-10
80637 Munich
Germany

Tel.: +49.89.2500790-50
Fax: +49.89.2500790-59
munich@iprecht.de

 

horak.
Lawyers Vienna
Trauttmansdorffgasse 8
1130 Vienna
Austria

Tel.: +43.1.8761517
Fax: +49.511.357356-29
vienna@iprecht.de

 

Judgement of the Regional Appeal Court in Celle of 29th March 2001 - 13 U 309/00

The mere exploitation of the domain “anwalt-hannover.de” (“attorney-hanover.de”) by an attorney-at-law constitutes misleading advertising under § 3 of the Unfair Competition Act.

(...)

Findings of fact:

The parties to the dispute are attorneys-at-law admitted before a court in (…). The plaintiff makes a claim on the defendants to cease and desist from commercially using the domain “www.anwalt-hannover.de” (“www.attorney-hanover.de”) in the internet without any other distinctive features. The Regional Court issued the interim injunction applied for. The defendants have lodged an appeal against this ruling.

Court’s reasoning:

The appeal is unfounded.

I.
The plaintiff is legally entitled to the asserted right to forbearance.

According to § 43b of the Federal Lawyers’ Act (Bundesrechtsanwaltsordnung – BRAO) and § 6 (1) of the Occupational Regulations for the Bar (Berufsordnung der Rechtsanwälte – BORA), attorneys are allowed to inform about their professional activity objectively as to form and contents. In principle, an attorney can also present his offer on an internet home page. However, like any other advertising measure, an advertisement in the internet is inadmissible, if it violates the prohibition to mislead under § 3 of the Unfair Competition Act (Feurich/Braun, BRAO, 5. Ed., § 43 b Rdnr. 38; cf. BVerfG NJW 2000, 3195), which is the case here.

Persons who want to find the “right” lawyer by means of the internet (especially using the so called search engines), usually obtain an overview listing the respective documents including domain names. If they happen to come across the domain “www.anwalt-hannover.de”, they are likely to be mislead, since a considerable group (from the legal point of view) of average informed and reasonable internet users expects to find under such a domain designation a home page of a central service providing offers of a number of law offices in this area. Such an interpretation can be supported by the fact that – according to the statement of claim which has been substantiated by prima facie evidence – similar domain addresses – "www.hannover-rechtsanwalt.de", "www.rechtsanwaelte-hannover.de", "www.anwalt.de" oder "www.hannovers-rechtsanwaelte.de" – already provide or are being constructed to provide a centrally prepared summary of information on attorneys-at-law.

This deception is likely to influence potential clients’ choices of an attorney-at-law in a manner pertinent to competition law. As far as that is concerned, it is sufficient that due to the misleading name “www.anwalt-hannover.de” potential clients are prompted to use the home page of the defendant, which they would probably have not found or noticed otherwise (baiting by means of misleading information: cf. Baumbach/Hefermehl, 21. Ed., § 3 UWG Rdnr. 89 a).

II.
The necessity for urgent proceedings required for issuing interim injunction is given here.

The urgency of the matter is presumed under § 25 of the Unfair Competition Act. The defendants did not rebut the urgency presumption. There is no indication that the plaintiff had been aware of the internet name in question some time before moving for an interim injunction. Therefore, the defendants must substantiate by prima facie evidence.

III.
The costs order is based on § 97 (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

© 1998-2017 IP Attorney at law Michael Horak, LL.M, Certified IP Law Specialist

ip-attorney-ip-lawyer german law german lawyer patent law patent application file patent lawyer print trademark-law-patent-domain-design-utility-model-europe design law eu design community design law design right international design save law-of-technics-multi-media-law-german-business-lawyerback european-trademark-protection-german-trademarks-european-lawenquiry