Facts
The Federal Supreme Court decided in a case where a Swiss company ([X. AG] , the appellant) had sued a German ([A.] , the respondent) for infringement of personality rights and unfair competition. The respondent had referred to the appellant on his website as a "directory fraud", "directory mafia", "forger of signatures", "confidence trickster" and "fraudster".
The Federal Supreme Court concluded that the terms used by the respondent, in the overall context of his website, cannot be classified as unnecessarily defamatory or untrue. The allegations essentially corresponded to the conduct of the appellant, who had deceived customers with its business practices.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court stated that in assessing whether a statement is unfair or infringes on personality rights, the overall context must be taken into account. The decisive factor is how the average reader understands the statements in the context. Even though the terms used by the respondent appear sensationalist, they correspond to the conduct of the appellant and are therefore not disproportionate or unnecessarily defamatory.
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of the…