Sections 14 to 26 UWG form the procedural and liability framework of Austrian unfair competition law. They govern how companies can take action against unfair competition, which claims they are entitled to, and the consequences of infringements. At the center is the claim for an injunction, which makes it possible to stop anti-competitive behavior quickly—regardless of whether damage has already occurred. In addition, these provisions define claims for damages, rights to publish judgments, as well as liability and penal regulations. At the same time, preliminary injunctions create the possibility to immediately stop unlawful acts even before a final judgment is reached.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Significance of Sections 14 to 26 UWG

Sections 14 to 26 UWG govern how companies can specifically defend themselves against unfair competition. While the previous provisions define what is prohibited, these rules show how to actually enforce your rights.

At the heart of this is a clear idea: competition law infringements should be stopped quickly and economic damage limited. That is why the law provides several tools that work together. Companies can not only react, but also take proactive action against impending infringements.

It is particularly important that the UWG is structured with practical application in mind. It takes typical problems in day-to-day business into account, such as the fact that damage is often difficult to prove or that infringements must be stopped quickly. This creates a system that does not only protect in theory, but actually works.

The claim for an injunction under Section 14 UWG

The claim for an injunction is the cornerstone of competition law. It ensures that a company must immediately cease unfair conduct – regardless of whether damage has already occurred.

This makes it particularly effective. In practice, it is rarely about compensating for damage that has already occurred. Much more important is to prevent further damage from the outset.

The objectives of the claim for an injunction are:

• Stopping misleading advertising
• Preventing unfair business practices
• Protection against further market distortions

Requirements for the claim for an injunction

For a claim for an injunction to be successfully enforced, clear legal requirements must be met.

At its core, two elements come together:

• Unlawful conduct in competition
• Risk of first-time or repeat infringement

Risk of first-time infringement:
This exists where no infringement has yet occurred, but concrete indications show that such an infringement is imminent. There must be clear indications of planned unlawful conduct.

Risk of repetition:
This exists where a company has already infringed competition law. In that case, it is automatically assumed that the conduct could be repeated. The affected party does not need to prove anything further.

Importantly: The claim for an injunction does not require fault. It also makes no difference whether the competition law infringement was committed intentionally or negligently. The decisive factor is solely that unlawful conduct exists or is threatened. Thus, even an unintentional competition law infringement can be prohibited if it violates the rules of fair competition.

The claim for an injunction does not serve to punish the party acting, but to prevent further infringements of the law.

Distinction from removal under Section 15 UWG

The claim for an injunction and the claim for removal are often mentioned together, but they pursue different objectives.

The claim for an injunction is forward-looking. It prevents unlawful conduct from occurring again or being committed for the first time. The claim for removal applies where infringements have already occurred. It requires the party responsible to actively eliminate an existing unlawful situation.

Removal measures include:

• Removing unlawful advertising statements from websites or posters
• Recalling or amending content that has already been disseminated

Anyone acting unlawfully must often not only stop the behavior but also eliminate the consequences. This ensures that competition does not remain permanently distorted.

Right to information under Section 14a UWG

The right to information under Section 14a UWG is a narrow special rule in competition law. It serves to establish the identity of persons behind unfair business practices. Competitors themselves are not entitled to bring the claim; it is available only to certain statutorily designated bodies.

It is directed exclusively against businesses that offer postal or telecommunications services. Where certain statutory requirements are met, they must disclose the following existing user data:

• Name or company name
• Date of birth
• Address

The following applies: Only data may be requested that is available without additional investigations and relates to a domestic telephone number or a domestic PO box.

The request for information must be made in writing and must show that the information is necessary for legal enforcement and cannot be obtained otherwise.

Claim for damages under Section 16 UWG

In addition to the claim for an injunction, there is the possibility of claiming damages pursuant to Section 16 UWG. This enables consumers and businesses to claim compensation for financial disadvantages arising from a competition law infringement. The purpose of the claim is to place the injured party in the economic position they would have been in without the unlawful act.

The first requirement is a competition law infringement of one of the provisions expressly mentioned in Section 16 UWG.

Consumers can claim damages for the following infringements:

• Aggressive or misleading business practices according to items 1 to 31 of the Annex to the UWG
• Infringements of Section 1 (1) No. 2 UWG
• Infringements of Section 1a UWG
• Infringements of Section 2 UWG
• Infringements of Section 2a UWG

Businesses are entitled to a claim for damages for the following competition law infringements:

• Unfair business practices under Sections 1 to 2a UWG
• Disparagement of a company under Section 7 UWG
• Misuse of signs under Section 9 UWG
• Bribery of employees or agents under Section 13 UWG
• Use of unauthorized means in printed works under Section 21 (3) UWG
• Infringements of administrative law provisions under Section 34 (3) UWG

Furthermore, for liability to arise, the general requirements of Austrian law on damages must be met. The basis for this is Sections 1293 et seq. ABGB. Required are unlawful conduct, concrete damage, a causal connection between the competition law infringement and the damage, and fault on the part of the wrongdoer. Even slight negligence may be sufficient to establish liability for damages. The injured party must prove that these requirements are met.

Types of compensable damage

If the requirements for a claim for damages are met, different types of damage can be compensated. It is always decisive that the damage has actually occurred and can be traced back to the competition law infringement.

A distinction is made in particular between actual loss and lost profits.

Positive damage

Positive damage includes all directly incurred financial disadvantages caused by the competition law infringement. This includes additional costs, financial losses, or other economic burdens that reduce the injured party’s assets.

Consumers can, according to § 16 para. 1 UWG in principle only the damage actually incurred, i.e. positive damage, may be claimed. This makes clear that the damage may lie not only in economic terms, but also in the external perception of a business.

Lost Profit

Lost profits concern economic advantages or profits that would likely have been achieved without the competition law infringement but which actually failed to materialize. The claim requires that the expectation of profit was realistic and comprehensible under the circumstances of the individual case.

Under Section 16 (2) UWG, businesses can demand lost profits in addition to actual loss.

Limitation periods and deadlines under Section 20 UWG

In competition law, clear limitation rules determine how long claims can be enforced. Anyone who acts too late loses their rights – regardless of how clear the infringement was.

In principle, the law distinguishes between two types of time limits:

• objective limitation period: begins with the infringement itself, regardless of whether the affected party is aware of it
• subjective limitation period: begins as soon as the affected party has knowledge of the infringement and the responsible party, or could have recognised this

Different time limits apply depending on the claim:

Claim for Injunctive Relief

• 6-month period from knowledge of the infringement
• maximum 3 years from the infringement
• Special feature: In the case of continuing situations, the period often starts only when the unlawful conduct is ended

Claim for Damages

• 3-year period from knowledge of the damage and the party causing it
• up to a maximum period of 30 years
• no special rule for continuing situations; the period continues to run regardless

The practical significance is considerable: While claims for an injunction must be asserted quickly, there is significantly more time for damages. Anyone who knows the differences can enforce their claims in a targeted and timely manner.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Liability in competition law

Liability in competition law is deliberately broad to ensure that infringements can be pursued effectively. The person who committed the competition law infringement is held liable. In addition, however, other persons may also be responsible if they are involved in the act or enable it.

These include in particular:

• The company itself
• Officers such as managing directors of a GmbH, management board of an AG
• Employees and commissioned third parties

The decisive factor is whether the conduct can be attributed to the company. Liability therefore goes beyond the direct perpetrator. It covers all those who make a material contribution to the competition law infringement.

Liability of companies, corporate bodies and involved third parties under Section 18 UWG

In competition law, responsibility primarily lies with the company itself. Even if a legal entity does not act directly, the conduct of those persons who act for it or make decisions on its behalf is attributed to it, such as managing directors, employees or commissioned third parties.

Particularly relevant are:

• Corporate bodies are additionally personally liable if they themselves are involved in the infringement
• In the case of claims for an injunction, companies are liable even without their own fault
• For damages, at least negligence is required

Employees and external partners such as agencies or service providers may also be covered, provided they are integrated into the business activity. The decisive factor is not formal status, but whether the company can legally influence the conduct.

Joint and several liability of multiple parties involved under Section 17 UWG

If several persons are involved in a competition law infringement, joint and several liability applies.
Each party involved may be held liable for the entire damage. The injured party may therefore freely choose whom to pursue for payment.

As between themselves, the parties involved can later clarify who ultimately bears which share.

Stopping unlawful communications in printed publications
under Section 21 UWG

The provisions of the UWG also make it possible to specifically prevent the further dissemination of unlawful communications in printed publications. This is particularly important where a competition law infringement is spread via the media and therefore quickly affects a broad public.

Action may be taken not only against the actual perpetrator, but also against those involved in dissemination, such as publishers or editors. This ensures that unlawful content is not disseminated further, even if the perpetrator no longer has direct access to the medium.

Cases of application are:

• misleading or unlawful advertisements in newspapers or magazines
• disparaging or false statements about competitors in printed publications
• comparative advertising with unlawful content

This rule strengthens the enforcement of competition law because it prevents unlawful content from continuing to spread and thereby causing ongoing damage in competition.

Penal provisions and sanctions

In addition to civil-law claims, competition law also provides for criminal-law and administrative-law consequences. These apply in particular in the case of serious or intentional infringements. The aim of sanctions is not only to stop unfair conduct, but also to have a deterrent effect.

The following measures may be considered:

• Fines for administrative offenses:
  These are punished by administrative authorities and primarily concern infringements of consumer protection and market conduct rules. There is a risk of fines, which may also be based on turnover depending on the severity of the infringement.
• Court-imposed penalties:
  These apply in particularly serious cases and are imposed by criminal courts. The prerequisite is intentional conduct or a deliberate omission despite a duty to act.

Requirements for criminal-law consequences

Criminal-law sanctions in competition law apply only where conduct goes beyond a mere breach of competition rules. The decisive factor is, above all, that intentional misconduct, or at least misconduct consciously accepted, is present.

Core requirements are:

• the company recognises that its conduct is unlawful, but acts anyway
• the company consciously accepts a possible legal infringement
• no action is taken even though there would have been the possibility to prevent the conduct

A central role is played by Section 19 UWG. This provision clarifies that the business owner may also be responsible if they do not prevent an infringement within their own business. Active participation is therefore not required. The conscious failure to prevent an infringement is sufficient.

This means specifically:

• Anyone who knows or must recognise a competition law infringement must intervene
• Anyone who does not act even though they could act may be criminally liable

Administrative penalties for serious infringements under Section 22 UWG

The provision of Section 22 UWG is often overestimated. It establishes no general administrative penal liability for competition law infringements, but is limited to a clearly defined special area.

Specifically, Section 22 UWG serves the implementation and enforcement of Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 on cooperation in consumer protection (CPC Regulation). The provision therefore applies only in cross-border situations.

Requirements are:

• a widespread infringement or a widespread infringement with a Union dimension
• an infringement of consumer-protective provisions, in particular in the area of unfair business practices
• action within the framework of coordinated enforcement by the competent authorities

The sanctions can be substantial and may, for example, be based on the company’s economic capacity. However, the aim is not the general sanctioning of competition law infringements, but the effective enforcement of EU consumer protection law in the internal market.

Enforcement for breaches of injunction orders
under Section 23 UWG

The provision is not a general instrument for the enforcement of claims for an injunction.

The compulsory enforcement of court injunction orders is generally carried out under the rules of the Enforcement Act (EO). Section 23 UWG merely supplements this system in a narrowly limited special area.

Specifically, Section 23 UWG is also connected with the CPC Regulation (EU) 2017/2394. The provision applies where:

• a company has been obliged to cease certain unfair business practices,
• and this conduct is continued despite the existing obligation,
• with the case falling within the scope of administrative cooperation in consumer protection.

In most cases, the enforcement of claims for an injunction continues to take place via the classic instruments of the Enforcement Act, through fines to compel compliance with the injunction. Section 23 UWG plays a role only in specific exceptional cases with an EU-law connection.

Procedural particularities under the UWG

Competition law has some special procedural rules that enable swift and effective enforcement. A key feature is that proceedings take place on an expedited basis. The background is that competition law infringements have immediate effects and therefore must be stopped quickly.

Special features are:

• Simplified requirements for interim measures
• Possibility of excluding the public to protect sensitive information

Excluding the public is particularly considered where trade or business secrets are affected. This ensures that companies can enforce their rights without having to disclose internal information.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Interim injunction under Section 24 UWG

The interim injunction is one of the most important instruments in competition law when swift action is required. It makes it possible to stop a competition law infringement even before a final court decision.

The major advantage is speed. Companies do not have to wait for the entire proceedings, but can intervene early if an infringement is imminent or has already begun.

In the UWG in particular, there is a facilitation:
An interim injunction may also be issued without the onerous proof of special urgency. This significantly accelerates legal protection.

This ensures that economic damage does not arise in the first place or does not spread further.

Process and particularities of interim proceedings

Proceedings for the issuance of an interim injunction are referred to as interim proceedings. They are deliberately simplified and designed for speed.

The focus is not on the final clarification of all details, but on a provisional decision based on a swift review.

Features of the proceedings are:

• simplified taking of evidence by prima facie proof
• swift court decision
• no final binding effect for the main proceedings

This means: The court examines whether a claim is likely to exist without taking all evidence in full.

Exclusion of the public from the hearing under Section 26 UWG

In competition law, the court may also exclude the public from the hearing to protect sensitive information. This provision applies where business secrets or internal processes would otherwise be disclosed.
The aim is to ensure a fair trial without unnecessarily harming companies.

Grounds for exclusion are:

• Protection of trade and business secrets
• Avoidance of economic disadvantages due to public disclosure
• Safeguarding the parties’ legitimate interests

Publication of judgments and protection of reputation under Section 25 UWG

If a company has been portrayed negatively in public due to a competitor’s unfair conduct, a court may order publication of the judgment. Protection of reputation ensures that a company’s good name is restored after a competition law infringement or protected from further harm.

Publication serves to:

• inform the public about the actual facts
• restore the injured company’s reputation

Purpose and requirements of publishing the judgment

Publishing the judgment primarily serves to protect a company’s good reputation. If a company has been harmed by unfair conduct, the public should be informed about the actual legal situation.

The prerequisite is that publication is necessary and appropriate. It is examined to what extent publication is necessary to correct the impression created. It must not go beyond what is required, but must be aligned with the reach and impact of the original infringement.

Key criteria are:

• Extent of reputational harm
• Reach of the original act
• Public interest in clarification

Publication is generally made at the expense of the unsuccessful company and may take place in suitable media such as newspapers, websites or other relevant communication channels.

Practical significance for companies

The rules in Sections 14 to 26 UWG are of considerable importance for day-to-day business. They determine how quickly and effectively action can be taken against unfair competition.

For businesses, this means on the one hand an increased risk of being confronted quickly with claims for an injunction in the event of unlawful conduct. On the other hand, the claim for an injunction offers the opportunity to take swift action against unfair conduct by competitors and to effectively prevent competition law infringements. In this way, competition law creates clear legal framework conditions and contributes to fair competition in the market.

The claim for an injunction is particularly relevant, as it can often be enforced more quickly than damages. Companies must therefore ensure that their measures are legally sound.

Your Benefits with Legal Assistance

Anyone wishing to defend themselves against unfair competition quickly faces complex legal and strategic questions. Sections 14 to 26 UWG show that it is not only about “being right”, but above all about taking the right steps at the right time. Mistakes can lead to claims being lost or proceedings becoming unnecessarily expensive.

Legal representation ensures that you can enforce your rights efficiently, quickly and with legal certainty – while also avoiding risks.

Specific advantages:

• Swift action: A lawyer enforces claims for an injunction in a targeted manner and makes optimal use of interim injunctions.
• Strategic enforcement: You choose between an injunction, damages or publication – aligned with your specific objective.
• Risk minimisation: Mistakes in filing suit, deadlines or evidence are avoided, reducing costs and disadvantages.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Frequently Asked Questions – FAQ

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation