Emergency · e-commerce & unfair-competition law

Webshop warned —
or sued outright?
We check before the deadline runs out.

Consumer associations such as VKI and VSV are currently taking increased action against online shops — over unfair T&C clauses and voucher terms. Frequently there is not even a warning, but immediately a representative action for an injunction together with an application for publication of the judgment at the Vienna Commercial Court. Precisely such a publication, which is regularly granted in Austria, often costs tens of thousands of euros. Anyone who reacts incorrectly or too late risks not only costs, but also reputational damage. On business days we react fast — within 24 hours at the latest.

Fast on business days — within 24 hours at the latest
Award-winning in unfair-competition & IT/e-commerce law

Award-winning 2025 / 2026

TOP2026 DER STANDARD · Statista TOP law firm 2026 — trademark & unfair-competition law
Corporate INTL 2026 Unfair Competition Law Firm of the Year — Austria
The Lawyer Network 2026 Unfair Competition Law Firm of the Year — Austria

What this is about

A wave of clause proceedings

Since the recognition of the Association for the Protection of Consumer Interests (Verein zum Schutz von Verbraucherinteressen, VSV) as a qualified entity for collective enforcement, Austria has a further player for consumer-law representative actions alongside the Association for Consumer Information (Verein für Konsumenteninformation, VKI) and the Chamber of Labour (Arbeiterkammer, AK) — which, combined with recent court decisions, is leading to a sharply increased number of representative actions. In the line of fire are webshops of every size: domestic retailers as well as foreign providers that deliver to Austria and use their — often English-translated — general terms and conditions unchanged towards Austrian consumers too.

The associations proceed along two tracks: on the one hand, the clause action under the Consumer Protection Act (KSchG) against unfair T&C clauses; on the other, the unfair-competition representative action under the UWG against misleading or aggressive advertising and voucher practices. Both routes seek an injunction — combined with authorisation to publish the judgment at the company's expense, as a rule in Austria's highest-circulation daily newspaper. Amounts in dispute of EUR 30,000 and more are common, and the costs of publishing the judgment regularly run to tens of thousands of euros.

The most common points of attack

Which clauses are currently falling

Strikingly, it is usually not the exotic but the entirely everyday clause that falls — challenged above all for a lack of transparency. What is decisive is always the specific clause in the overall context of your T&Cs.

Lack of transparency — the real heavy weapon (§ 6(3) KSchG)

A clause must be clear and comprehensible and must not obscure the legal position. This is precisely where most representative actions start — and it regularly hits entirely ordinary standard clauses: for example, when it remains unclear when the contract is actually concluded, when reference is made to "the stated reasons" without naming them, when cancellation or processing periods are vaguely worded, or when the customer is left to work out the permissible scope of a clause for themselves.

Surprising & grossly disadvantageous clauses (§ 864a, § 879(3) ABGB)

Clauses that a customer need not expect given the outward appearance of the contract are invalid — as are those that disadvantage the customer one-sidedly without objective justification. A typical example is the provision that, where an order is shipped in several parcels, a separate contract of sale is concluded for each.

Inadmissible fictions of consent and confirmation (§ 6(1) no. 2 KSchG)

Clauses that assume the customer's consent (for example to invoicing exclusively by electronic means) or that impute to the customer a confirmation of facts or knowledge and thereby shift the burden of proof are invalid.

Exclusion of warranty and liability (§ 9, § 6(1) no. 9 KSchG)

A full waiver of warranty is impermissible in consumer transactions. Liability for personal injury cannot be excluded at all, and for other damage not in the case of intent or gross negligence. The addition "to the extent legally permissible" does not save such clauses — it is itself non-transparent.

Special case: translated foreign T&Cs

Common-law constructs taken over from English — "as is / as available" or "punitive damages" — are incomprehensible to Austrian consumers (which is ultimately also a transparency breach) and incompatible with mandatory law. Such clauses are more the outliers, but they illustrate the transparency problem especially vividly.

Voucher time limits

Vouchers are, in principle, only time-barred after 30 years. A shortening requires an objectively justifiable reason — the shorter the period, the more compelling it must be. Even a limit of five years can be too short if the customer cannot have the voucher paid out.

Voucher redemption with conditions

Clauses that tie redemption to a minimum order value, let residual credit lapse, prohibit partial redemption or exclude combination with promotions are regularly grossly disadvantageous (§ 879(3) ABGB).

Other perennials

Inadmissible choice-of-law and jurisdiction clauses, pre-ticked newsletter/advertising boxes, non-transparent delivery, withdrawal and cost clauses as well as blanket references to terms that are not attached.

A second front (UWG)

Not only clauses: misleading voucher & advertising practices

A second line of attack targets not the T&Cs themselves, but the marketing around vouchers and credit. Here the associations sue under unfair-competition law (UWG) — for misleading or aggressive commercial practices.

Artificial expiry pressure on credit & vouchers

Reminder emails that present credit or a voucher as about to expire and push for immediate redemption create artificial time pressure. If the entitlement does not in fact lapse, the message can be misleading and unlawfully influence the purchasing decision (§§ 1, 2 UWG).

Redemption tied to conditions

If credit or a voucher code only becomes effective above a minimum order value or is tied to similar conditions, this can — in itself or together with expiry notices — amount to an unfair commercial practice.

What is at stake

If you do not react, or react incorrectly

Injunction

You may no longer use the clause — and must adapt your T&Cs.

Publication of the judgment

This is often where the real cost risk lies: the judgment is published at the company's expense, as a rule in Austria's highest-circulation daily newspaper — the publication costs regularly reach tens of thousands of euros. On top of this comes the reputational damage of a publicly documented infringement.

Costs

With amounts in dispute from EUR 30,000, court and lawyers' fees quickly add up to a five-figure sum.

Risk of repetition & contractual penalty

A cease-and-desist undertaking signed too hastily can make any future — even accidental — use painfully expensive.

How we proceed

What to do now

A representative action runs — unlike a warning — on court deadlines. We react fast on business days and keep the free initial telephone consultation clearly separate from the legal review of your specific T&Cs.

01
Take the deadline seriously

A claim triggers court deadlines. Anyone who fails to react risks a default judgment — including publication of the judgment. With tight deadlines, a call is enough.
02
Sign nothing unchecked

Pre-formulated cease-and-desist undertakings are regularly too broad. A modified declaration limits the obligation to what is actually necessary.
03
T&C audit

We check which clauses are actually vulnerable, where you should give way and where resistance is worthwhile — and draft legally sound replacement clauses.
04
Talk rather than escalate

Often the proceedings can be ended cost-effectively through a carefully worded, modified cease-and-desist undertaking — before court and publication costs accrue.

Your team for webshop proceedings

Unfair-competition & e-commerce law is our core field

Tonninger Schermaier & Partner has repeatedly been named "Unfair Competition Law Firm of the Year in Austria" and advises continuously on IT and e-commerce law. We defend you against representative actions — and get your T&Cs into shape so the next one does not come in the first place.

Your contacts

Dr. Bernhard Tonninger

Attorney at law · Partner

More than two decades of practical UWG experience, established in Austria as a specialist in unfair-competition law. Ongoing representation before the regional courts in Austria and the Vienna Commercial Court as well as in appeal proceedings before the higher regional courts, the Supreme Court and occasionally the CJEU.

Mag. Dr. Markus Albrecht

Attorney at law · Partner

Partner focusing on trademark, unfair-competition and copyright law as well as IT and e-commerce law. Out-of-court representation in warnings and representation in the relevant court proceedings.

In advisory practice both are your contacts; in complex proceedings we join forces. So even under time pressure there is always someone available who knows your case.

+43 1 218 44 40 office@ts.at

Frequently asked questions

What webshop operators want to know about representative actions

I was not warned, I was sued directly — is that permitted?

Yes. A prior warning is not mandatory for representative actions. VKI and VSV frequently sue directly for an injunction. That makes it all the more important to react immediately and observe the court deadline.

Who is even entitled to sue me?

For T&C clauses, only qualified entities under the Qualified Entities Act (QEG); in unfair-competition law, associations entitled to sue under § 14 UWG — in practice above all the Association for Consumer Information (Verein für Konsumenteninformation, VKI), the Chamber of Labour (Arbeiterkammer, AK) and the Association for the Protection of Consumer Interests (Verein zum Schutz von Verbraucherinteressen, VSV). We check whether standing and the specific claim actually exist.

I send voucher reminders to my customers — is that risky?

It depends on the message. Anyone who presents credit as expiring when it does not in fact lapse, builds up artificial time pressure or ties redemption to conditions such as a minimum order value risks an unfair-competition action (§§ 1, 2 UWG). We review your voucher communication before it becomes a problem.

My shop is based abroad — can I even be reached in Austria?

Yes. Anyone who specifically sells to Austria and delivers to consumers there can be sued at the Vienna Commercial Court (Art 7(2) Brussels Ia Regulation / EuGVVO). Standard T&Cs merely translated from English offer no protection.

Do I have to sign the requested cease-and-desist undertaking?

Not unchecked. Pre-formulated declarations are usually overreaching. A modified cease-and-desist undertaking drafted by a lawyer limits the obligation to what is actually necessary.

What will the proceedings cost me?

With amounts in dispute from EUR 30,000, five-figure costs arise quickly if it comes to a contested judgment. The real cost driver is often the requested publication of the judgment, which regularly causes costs of several tens of thousands of euros. An early, correct response is almost always considerably cheaper.

A claim or warning on your desk?

Pick up the phone — we will discuss your options right away. An initial assessment costs nothing.

Call +43 1 218 44 40 office@ts.at