01
Which specific conduct violates the UWG?
The advertising, solicitation, use or disclosure must be assigned to a specific competition law basis. A fall in sales or an aggressive market presence alone does not prove a legal violation.
Competition law focus
Damages for competition law violations.
A competition violation alone does not prove compensable loss. The legal basis, fault, a specific loss, causation and reliable documentation must all be assessed.
Damages are intended to compensate a business for the economic disadvantage caused by a specific competition law violation. Identifying unlawful conduct is not enough. The affected business must explain what disadvantage occurred and why the challenged conduct caused it.
The assessment is therefore narrower than a general explanation of the Austrian UWG. This page deals only with the requirements of a damages claim, typical forms of loss, causation and the records needed to support the claim. It does not calculate amounts or predict the outcome of proceedings.
Different legal bases may apply depending on the facts. Section 16 UWG clarifies that, where a damages claim exists, lost profit may also be claimed. Section 26e UWG provides a separate route for trade secret violations and requires, among other matters, an unlawful violation and fault.
Requirements
Four questions come before any valuation.
This order prevents premature figures. The form of loss can only be assessed meaningfully once the violation, the claimant, fault and causation have a sound basis.
02
Whose economic position was affected?
The claim must be assessed for the business that suffered the specific disadvantage. The power of certain bodies to seek an injunction does not automatically answer who has suffered its own financial loss.
03
Which fault standard applies?
The standard depends on the legal basis. For misleading statements, section 2 UWG links damages to knowledge or constructive knowledge. Section 26e UWG requires fault for trade secret violations. Actual knowledge and internal processes therefore require separate evidence.
04
Which loss was caused by that conduct?
There must be a specific economic disadvantage and a persuasive link to the violation. Claims about market loss, reputation or missed opportunities must be traced to verifiable events, periods and records.
Types of loss
The economic disadvantage needs a clear structure.
A damages file separates observable consequences from assumptions. It first describes what changed economically and then examines which part of that change can be attributed to the competition violation.
Specific financial disadvantage
Provable economic disadvantages triggered by the violation may be relevant. Depending on the case, this can include directly caused expenditure or losses of assets. Each item needs evidence and a legal basis.
Lost profit under section 16 UWG
Lost profit may form part of the claim. The business must show a plausible profit path without the violation, not merely possible revenue. Existing orders, reliable enquiries and earlier comparison periods may be relevant.
Consequences of a trade secret violation
Section 26e UWG requires a separate assessment where a trade secret was unlawfully acquired, used or disclosed. Relevant matters include ownership, protective measures, the infringing conduct, fault and the specific economic consequence.
Not every market loss is compensable
Economic conditions, seasonality, price changes, supply problems, new competitors or the business’s own sales decisions may explain the same result. These alternative causes must be examined openly instead of assigning the entire decline to the opposing party.
This page deliberately contains no damages calculator. The amount depends on the legal basis, available evidence, the business baseline and possible alternative causes.
Causation
The link between the violation and the loss must hold.
Causation asks whether the claimed disadvantage would have been avoided without the competition violation. In market settings, that link is rarely shown by one document. It usually emerges from a consistent chain of evidence.
Timing matters, but timing alone is not enough. If sales fall after a challenged campaign starts, the assessment must also ask which customer group was addressed, whether the products or services were genuinely comparable and which other developments affected the same period.
The counterfactual comparison needs a transparent basis. Earlier periods, unaffected sales territories, existing customer relationships, documented quotation histories or specific feedback may be suitable. The appropriate method depends on the business model, data quality and subject of the dispute.
For lost profit, the hypothetical development without the violation must be explained. Assumptions must remain visible. Separating baseline data, analytical steps and uncertainty makes the alleged connection easier to review both legally and economically.
01
Define the violation precisely
Record the statement or conduct, medium, audience, period and market participants.
02
Locate the economic change
Use existing data to identify the time and business segment affected.
03
Evidence the connection
Connect orders, enquiries, customer feedback and market context to the specific conduct.
04
Test alternative causes
Assess seasonality, pricing, availability, internal measures and other market changes separately.
05
Disclose assumptions
Clearly separate facts, estimates and unresolved evidential questions in the file.
Documentation
A reliable file connects law and business data.
The records should preserve the original state, make the economic development traceable and protect confidential information. Documentation should start early, not only when litigation is being prepared.
01
Preserve the original conduct
Preserve advertising, web pages, price claims, messages or product presentations with the date, location, full context and technical origin. Isolated extracts may distort the overall impression. Keep original files and unchanged copies separately.
02
Record the timeline
Create a chronology of first discovery, start and end of the conduct, internal responses, customer contacts and economic changes. Record the responsible person and source of each document.
03
Segment business data appropriately
Compile sales, contribution margins, quotations, orders, cancellations and enquiries only for the period, market and product segment actually affected. Store raw data, analysis and assumptions separately.
04
Document customer evidence lawfully
Specific feedback may matter for causation. Its source, wording and any consent requirements must be assessed. General complaints do not by themselves prove a lost order.
05
Limit sensitive information
Do not copy or publish trade secrets, personal data or third party contracts without control. A structured inventory is sufficient for the initial legal review. Secure transmission can be arranged separately.
06
Record gaps and counterarguments
Missing data, alternative causes and contradictory records belong in the file. Transparent uncertainty is more reliable than apparent precision without sound support.
Avoid public allegations or warning lists while the facts, claim and evidence remain unassessed. Publication of a judgment under section 25 UWG is a separate legal instrument and is not the same as publishing allegations independently.
Separate the remedies
Injunctions and damages serve different purposes.
Several remedies may need to be assessed in the same matter. They do not automatically rest on identical requirements and they call for different evidence.
Injunction and interim relief
These remedies seek to stop or secure against specific conduct. The legal claim, scope of the prohibition, evidence and purpose of the measure are central. A possible injunction claim does not prove compensable loss.
Compensation for economic disadvantage
Damages focus on the economic consequences. In addition to the violation, the applicable fault standard, specific loss and causation must be examined. The damages file therefore does not replace the injunction file.
Next steps
Clarify the terms and present the matter systematically.
Use only the records relevant to your case. Confidential documents should be transmitted only after an appropriate channel has been agreed.
Review the glossary
The glossary provides concise explanations of central Austrian competition law terms without repeating general UWG guidance.
Open the glossaryDiscuss the facts and evidence
For an initial assessment, it is useful to identify the conduct, period, affected market segments and the records already preserved.
Contact the firm Frequently asked questions
Suitable further guidance on damages.
Where is the stopping of ongoing conduct addressed? +
The injunction and interim relief topic covers evidence preservation and the possible protective purpose.
Where can I find concise explanations of the terms used? +
The competition law glossary explains damages, injunction claims and further terms in concise form.
How can I prepare the specific facts for review? +
The firm’s contact page provides the contact options for a structured initial outline of the matter.
Subscribe to legal updates
Receive new articles and legal guidance from the firm with BRANDaktuelle Rechtsnews.
Subscribe to the newsletterThis page provides general information on Austrian competition law and does not replace legal advice in an individual case. Whether damages can be claimed depends on the legal basis, fault, loss, causation, evidence and the specific role of the parties.
Have the loss and evidence assessed.
We assess the specific competition violation, its economic consequences and the available records with you. A conflict check is required before a mandate can be accepted.