Parship, Elitepartner

Contract extensions on dating websites not permitted

The VKI had filed a lawsuit against PE Digital GmbH - operator of the two dating websites Parship and Elitepartner.

(Bild: parship.at)

The automatic contract extensions on the dating websites Parship and Elitepartner are not permitted. This was decided by the Supreme Court, thus confirming the criticism of the Association for Consumer Information. 

The VKI had filed a lawsuit against PE Digital GmbH - the operator of the two websites - on behalf of the Ministry of Social Affairs. The ruling is legally binding, as stated in a press release issued by the VKI on Thursday.

The lawsuit was prompted by numerous complaints in connection with the automatic renewal of contracts after the initial term had expired. In order for women and men to make full use of the two platforms, they must take out a paid premium membership. Singles can opt for initial terms of six, twelve or 24 months.

Duty to inform not fulfilled
In order for automatic contract extensions to be effective, the contract must provide for a notice period and the company must specifically inform customers of this at the beginning of this period. PE Digital GmbH had not yet sufficiently complied with this duty to inform, according to the VKI when the lawsuit was filed. The information could only be retrieved if customers actively took action in their profile areas. Notifying customers by email was not sufficient, also due to a particularly long and unspecific subject line.

In March 2022, the VKI was ruled in favor of all of the contested points before the Commercial Court of Vienna, and a two-year commitment period was also deemed unlawful. The Supreme Court has now largely dismissed PE Digital GmbH's appeal on points of law. The VKI's claim was therefore justified with regard to two business practices and eight objectionable clauses.

"Elaborate procedure"
The relevant information for the objection was not apparent in the profile alone, but could only be accessed in conjunction with the platform T&Cs. "As the Supreme Court has now confirmed, such an elaborate procedure does not constitute a clear indication of a fictitious declaration and its significance," said VKI lawyer Maximilian Eder.

A 24-month contract commitment that does not include the option of early termination is also inadmissible. The Consumer Protection Act provides for certain contracts for recurring services to be terminated at the end of the first year.

However, the Supreme Court also ruled that the terms and conditions for product-related contractual content with regard to contracts with an initial term of six months provided for a contract extension of twelve months, whereas the general terms and conditions provided for an extension by the original contract term. The VKI considers this to be a disadvantage for consumers.