Facts
The case concerns two consumer magazines, the German-language "K-Tipp" and the French-language "Bon à savoir", which published a survey on customer satisfaction with health insurance companies. ÖKK Kranken- und Unfallversicherungen AG (ÖKK) then demanded that the publishers, Konsumenteninfo AG (Complainant 1) and Editions Plus S.à.r.l. (Complainant 2), publish a right of reply, as ÖKK and Sympany should not be equated as independent companies.
Instead, the complainants published a "clarification by the editorial staff" in their magazines and on the websites. However, ÖKK insisted on a court order for the right of reply, which the lower courts granted. The complainants then appealed to the Federal Supreme Court.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court had to assess whether the publication of the correction by the media companies eliminates ÖKK's right of reply.
The Federal Supreme Court states that the purpose of the right of reply is to enable the person concerned to present their own version of the facts in order to establish a kind of "equality of arms" in the public media. However, if the media company publishes a correction that correctly and completely reflects the position of the person concerned and complies with the publication regulations, this can eliminate the right of reply.
The Federal Supreme Court examines the publications of the complainants in detail:
For the publication in the "K-Tipp", the Federal Supreme Court denies that the placement in the letters to the editor section meets the requirements, as the contested article had appeared in the editorial part. For the publication on the website "www.ktipp.ch", the Federal Supreme Court comes to the…