Facts
In 1985, the discount store X. opened a branch in Basel. In the catalog, newspaper advertisements, and posters in the store, customers were encouraged to negotiate prices and demand the lowest daily price. Although specific prices for the offered goods were stated, the company made it clear that it was willing to sell these goods at prices below the stated prices.
The President of the Police Court of the Canton of Basel-City initially acquitted the director of the company X. However, the Court of Appeal overturned this decision and remanded the case for the conviction of the director for violation of the Price Disclosure Ordinance.
The director then filed a nullity appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Considerations
According to the Price Disclosure Ordinance, the actual price to be paid must be disclosed for goods offered for sale to the end consumer. The prices must be made visible by labeling on the goods themselves or immediately next to them.
The company's approach of emphatically urging customers to negotiate prices and demand the lowest daily price meant that the stated prices were merely considered as guide prices and not as the actual prices to be paid within the meaning of the Ordinance. Thus, the company violated the obligation to disclose prices.
The appellant's argument that the slogans used…