The TAR cancels the Antitrust fine of 1 million to Poltronesofà for an incorrect practice

The commercial practice contested by the Antitrust at the end of last year in Poltronesofà Spa "cannot be said to be illicit, given that it does not cause any appreciable alteration of consumer freedom". This is the reason with which the Lazio Regional Administrative Court canceled the one million euro fine imposed by the Authority on the company specialized in the design, marketing and retail sale of sofas and armchairs.

The Antitrust, following the assessments of an investigation initiated by a report from a consumer association, found that on various occasions the company had launched promotional campaigns consisting in the offer of sofas (belonging to the so-called 'Promo Collection') produced specifically for promotional sales, at a significantly reduced price, and emphasizing the existence of a significant "discount" compared to a much higher price, indicated as "barred". For the Authority, the emphasized convenience would have been non-existent, and the commercial practice carried out would have been contrary to professional diligence and in any case capable of inducing consumers to take a commercial decision that they otherwise would not have taken. Hence the sanction and subsequent administrative appeal.

After evaluating the documents, it became clear to the TAR that "the circumstance that the company adopted a commercial strategy aimed at marketing sofas at an advantageous price (to attract the most price-sensitive customers) and then, faced with the need to comply with the legal requirements, increased the price in order to be able to subsequently discount it, constitutes nothing other than an expression of the economic freedom of the entrepreneur: it is therefore an unquestionable choice". Therefore "what the deception of which the consumer is the victim of is not well clarified in the provision, since the professional cannot be expected to explain to the potential customer what his margins are, or what commercial strategy he is pursuing: this is obviously confidential information which must not be publicised. The emphasis placed by the Authority on the deceptiveness of the practice is therefore unacceptable".