Urteile

Urteile neu online gestellt

EuGH_en , Urteil v. 06.11.2003 - Az.: C-101/01
Leitsatz:

1. The act of referring, on an internet page, to various persons and identifying them by name or by other means, for instance by giving their telephone number or information regarding their working conditions and hobbies, constitutes " the processing of personal data wholly or partly by automatic means" within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 95/46 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. Such processing of personal data in the exercise of charitable or religious activity is not covered by any of the exceptions in paragraph 2 of that article.
The first exception, provided for by the first indent of paragraph 2, concerns the processing of personal data in the course of an activity which falls outside the scope of Community law, such as those provided for by Titles V and VI of the Treaty on European Union, and in any case processing operations concerning public security, defence, State security (including the economic well-being of the State when the processing operation relates to State security matters) and the activities of the State in areas of criminal law. The activities mentioned by way of example in that provision are, in any event, activities of the State or of State authorities unrelated to the fields of activity of individuals and intended to define the scope of the exception provided for there, with the result that that exception applies only to the activities which are expressly listed there or which can be classified in the same category. Charitable or religious activities cannot be considered equivalent to the activities listed in that provision and are thus not covered by that exception. The second exception, provided for by the second indent of paragraph 2, relates only to activities which are carried out in the course of private or family life of individuals, which is clearly not the case with the processing of personal data consisting in publication on the internet so that those data are made accessible to an indefinite number of people.
see paras 27, 38, 43-48, operative part 1-2
2. Reference to the fact that an individual has injured her foot and is on half-time on medical grounds constitutes personal data concerning health within the meaning of Article 8(1) of Directive 95/46 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. In the light of the purpose of the directive, the expression " data concerning health" used in that provision must be given a wide interpretation so as to include information concerning all aspects, both physical and mental, of the health of an individual.
see paras 50-51, operative part 3
3. There is no " transfer [of data] to a third country" within the meaning of Article 25 of Directive 95/46 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data where an individual in a Member State loads personal data onto an internet page which is stored on an internet site on which the page can be consulted and which is hosted by a natural or legal person who is established in that State or in another Member State, thereby making those data accessible to anyone who connects to the internet, including people in a third country.
Given, first, the state of development of the internet at the time Directive 95/46 was drawn up and, second, the absence of criteria applicable to use of the internet in Chapter IV in which Article 25 appears, and which is intended to allow the Member States to monitor transfers of personal data to third countries and to prohibit such transfer where they do not offer an adequate level of protection, one cannot presume that the Community legislature intended the expression " transfer [of data] to a third country" to cover the loading, by an individual in Mrs Lindqvist ? s position, of data onto an internet page, even if those data are thereby made accessible to persons in third countries with the technical means to access them.
see paras 63-64, 68, 71, operative part 4
4. The provisions of Directive 95/46 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data do not, in themselves, bring about a restriction which conflicts with the general principle of freedom of expression or other freedoms and rights, which are applicable within the European Union and are enshrined inter alia in Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. It is for the national authorities and courts responsible for applying the national legislation implementing Directive 95/46 to ensure a fair balance between the rights and interests in question, including the fundamental rights protected by the Community legal order.
see para. 90, operative part 5
5. Measures taken by the Member States to ensure the protection of personal data must be consistent both with the provisions of Directive 95/46 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data and with its objective of maintaining a balance between freedom of movement of personal data and the protection of private life. However, nothing prevents a Member State from extending the scope of the national legislation implementing the provisions of Directive 95/46 to areas not included in the scope thereof provided that no other provision of Community law precludes it.
see para. 99, operative part 6

EuGH_en , Urteil v. 06.11.2003 - Az.: C-243/01
Leitsatz:

National legislation which prohibits on pain of criminal penalties the pursuit of the activities of collecting, taking, booking and forwarding offers of bets, in particular on sporting events, without a licence or authorisation from the Member State concerned constitutes a restriction on freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services provided for in Articles 43 EC and 49 EC respectively, which, to be justified, must be based on imperative requirements in the general interest, be suitable for achieving the objective which they pursue and not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain it and be applied without discrimination.
In that connection, it is for the national court to determine whether such legislation, taking account of the detailed rules for its application, actually serves the aims which might justify it, and whether the restrictions it imposes are disproportionate in the light of those objectives.
In particular, in so far as the authorities of a Member State incite and encourage consumers to participate in lotteries, games of chance and betting to the financial benefit of the public purse, the authorities of that State cannot invoke public order concerns relating to the need to reduce opportunities for betting in order to justify measures such as those at issue in the main proceedings. Furthermore, where a criminal penalty was imposed on any person who from his home in a Member State connects by internet to a bookmaker established in another Member State the national court must consider whether this constitutes a disproportionate penalty.
see paras 65, 69, 72, 76, operative part

EuGH_en , Gutachten v. 11.03.2003 - Az.: C-322/01
Europäischer Gerichtshof , Beschluss v. 19.02.2004 - Az.: C 369/03P
Bundesgerichtshof, Urteil v. 22.07.2021 - Az.: I ZR 123/20
Leitsatz:

1. Die im Internetauftritt einer Rechtsanwältin enthaltene unzutreffende Behauptung, derzeit Mitglied der Vorstandsabteilung für Vermittlungen einer Rechtsanwaltskammer zu sein, ist eine irreführende geschäftliche Handlung, die auch dann im Sinne des § 5 Abs. 1 Satz 1 UWG geeignet ist, den Verbraucher oder sonstigen Marktteilnehmer zu einer geschäftlichen Handlung zu veranlassen, die er andernfalls nicht getroffen hätte, wenn in der Vergangenheit eine solche Mitgliedschaft bestanden hat.


2. Tatsächliche Umstände, die gegen eine geschäftliche Relevanz des als Irreführung beanstandeten Verhaltens im Sinne des § 5 Abs. 1 Satz 1 UWG sprechen, liegen in der Darlegungs- und Beweislast der auf Unterlassung in Anspruch genommenen Partei.


3. Eine Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft, die gegen eine Rechtsanwältin wegen der als unzutreffend beanstandeten Behauptung einer derzeitigen Mitgliedschaft in der Vorstandsabteilung für Vermittlungen einer Rechtsanwaltskammer Klage erhoben hat, kann den Vortrag der Beklagten, zu einem früheren Zeitpunkt Mitglied dieser Vorstandsabteilung gewesen zu sein, gemäß § 138 Abs. 4 ZPO wirksam mit Nichtwissen bestreiten.

Bundesgerichtshof, Urteil v. 27.05.2021 - Az.: I ZR 119/20
Leitsatz:

Das für die Prüfung der öffentlichen Zugänglichmachung relevante Kriterium "recht viele Personen" ist nicht erfüllt, wenn ein Produktfoto, dass zunächst von einem Verkäufer urheberrechtsverletzend auf einer Internethandelsplattform im Rahmen seiner Verkaufsanzeige öffentlich zugänglich gemacht worden war, nach Abgabe einer Unterlassungserklärung des Verkäufers nur noch durch die Eingabe einer rund 70 Zeichen umfassenden URL-Adresse im Internet zugänglich war und nach der Lebenserfahrung davon auszugehen ist, dass die URL-Adresse nur von Personen eingegeben wird, die diese Adresse zuvor - als das Foto vor Abgabe der Unterlassungserklärung noch im Rahmen der Anzeige des Verkäufers frei zugänglich gewesen war - abgespeichert oder sie sonst in irgendeiner Weise kopiert oder notiert haben, oder denen die Adresse von solchen Personen mitgeteilt worden war.

Landgericht Wiesbaden, Urteil v. 01.06.2021 - Az.: 11 O 47/21
Leitsatz:

Unerlaubte 1-Cent-Überweisungen

Bundesgerichtshof, Urteil v. 29.06.2021 - Az.: XI ZR 19/20
Leitsatz:

Zur Angabe des Sollzinssatzes für Überziehungskredite auf der Internetseite einer Bank "in auffallender Weise" im Sinne des Art. 247a § 2 Abs. 2 und 3 EGBGB

Oberlandesgericht Dresden, Beschluss v. 07.06.2021 - Az.: 4 W 235/21
Leitsatz:

Keine vorbeugender Unterlassungsanspruch

Bundesgerichtshof, Urteil v. 06.05.2021 - Az.: I ZR 167/20
Leitsatz:

Ein hinreichender Anlass für die Veröffentlichung eines gegen einen Mitbewerber erwirkten Urteils unter seiner namentlichen Nennung kann bestehen, wenn die angesprochenen Verkehrskreise ein schutzwürdiges Interesse an der Information über die untersagten unlauteren Geschäftsmethoden des Mitbewerbers haben und eine Aufklärung angezeigt ist, um sonst drohende Nachteile bei geschäftlichen Entscheidungen von ihnen abzuwenden.