Higher Regional Court: Eventim may not impose ticket insurance on customers

Legal success for consumer advocates in the fight against online design tricks such as "dark patterns". The Bamberg Higher Regional Court (OLG) has prohibited the ticket platform Eventim from repeatedly suggesting that customers take out ticket insurance via a pop-up window. In their ruling of February 5, which has now been published, the judges partially upheld a complaint by the German Federation of Consumer Organizations (vzbv) (case reference: 3 UKl 11/24 e). The consumer advocates had accused the Munich-based company of improperly influencing customers through the design of its website to pressure them into taking out insurance.

When consumers wanted to order tickets on eventim.de, the offer of paid ticket insurance jumped out at them in the shopping cart – clearly highlighted in color. Those who simply clicked through to the checkout did not get there directly. Instead, a window popped up in which Eventim once again and emphatically recommended taking out ticket insurance "to avoid the hassle and frustration of missing an event". Only after clicking on the "I bear the full risk" button were users able to purchase the desired event tickets without insurance.

Fear of total loss of the purchase price created

The OLG ruled that Eventim had violated the Digital Services Act (DSA) and competition law with the repeated additional offer. It considers the second request to have exceeded the threshold for undue influence. According to the court, the new request and the visual design of the website are intended to persuade users to take out insurance. Eventim has created a scenario that creates fear of a total loss of the purchase price and has a threatening effect. Furthermore, the impression could be created that the money for uninsured tickets is lost in any case – even if the organizer cancels the concert. This contradicts the legal situation and is misleading.

The ticket insurance was objectively useful for customers, Eventim had argued in vain. The average user could be expected to recognize the offer as a non-binding option. The pop-up window in question was also not a dark pattern or inadmissible "nagging", but a legitimate "reassurance" that no one had overlooked the offer. However, the OLG rejected the vzbv application to prohibit Eventim from also offering the insurance in the shopping cart for the first time. This was presented in a prominent manner and was more eye-catching than the text for the selected ticket. However, it was easily recognizable that the insurance was optional. Both parties have to bear the costs of the legal dispute themselves. The OLG did not allow an appeal. However, the ruling is not yet final, as an appeal to the Federal Court of Justice is possible.

(wpl)