Hungary: "Sale" – but is it really? Lessons from HCA proceedings against clothing and footwear webshops

In 2023, the Hungarian Competition Authority ("HCA") simultaneously launched three proceedings against CCC, Answear and About You on suspicion of misleading price indications and discount practices. These cases resulted in fines and compensation obligations exceeding HUF 1bln (approx. EUR 2.8m) in total.

What do the laws require?

The legal framework is defined by two pieces of legislation. The Unfair Commercial Practices Act Against Consumers prohibits misleading consumers – particularly with respect to pricing – as well as the use of psychological pressure, and requires traders to act with professional diligence. Since May 2022, the Price Decree (in line with the PID Directive) has required traders announcing a price reduction to display the lowest selling price applied during at least the preceding 30 days.

Three cases before the HCA

In the CCC case (VJ/17/2023), the HCA objected that the company simultaneously displayed multiple original or prior prices without adequate explanation, and that products were listed as discounted for significantly longer periods than they had been offered at full price. CCC undertook that, going forward, it would display only two prices (the current price and the lowest price from the preceding 30 days, accompanied by explanatory text), introduce a consumer protection compliance programme, and limit the duration of promotional advertising to a maximum of 60 days following the first markdown and, in the case of further gradual price reductions, for an additional maximum of 60 days. In the latter case, however, the "prior price", i.e. the reference point against which the extent of the discount is determined, would no longer be the original full price but the previous promotional price. After 120 days, CCC may no longer display a product's price as a "promotional" price. The HCA closed the case by accepting the commitments, without establishing an infringement.

In the Answear case (VJ/18/2023), similar problems arose. The markdown periods exceeded the duration of full-price sales, and the discount was displayed by reference to the higher "original" price rather than the lowest price applied during the preceding 30 days. Answear offered commitments similar to those made by CCC, and the HCA likewise closed the case without establishing an infringement – accepting the commitments and making their implementation mandatory.

The About You case (VJ/15/2023) is the most deterrent example. The HCA found that the company had engaged in a systemic misleading practice in relation to the display of promotional prices. It also used continuously running countdown clocks and "limited stock" warnings, which the HCA classified as aggressive commercial practices. This resulted in a fine of HUF 505m, already reduced thanks to a comprehensive compliance programme and consumer compensation (a HUF 1750 coupon for each affected customer). The total financial burden exceeded HUF 1bln.

Key takeaways

As a general expectation, the duration of promotion should not be disproportionately long compared to the period during which the products were offered at the full price. In the case of seasonal products, according to the approach accepted by the HCA, a product may be advertised as promotional for a maximum of 60 days following the first markdown and, in the case of gradual price reductions, for an additional 60 days. Thereafter, the price may no longer be presented as promotional (through strikethrough pricing, percentage savings, colour highlighting, etc.). Where multiple reference prices are displayed, the meaning of each must be clearly explained.

The HCA also examines internal control processes: professional diligence requires the implementation of internal policies, staff training and IT control mechanisms. The focus of the HCA's proceedings is not on individual campaigns or discounts, but rather on the system, principles and methods used to determine them and to display them on the website or application.

These three cases send a clear warning to market participants: prolonged markdowns, techniques creating artificial urgency, and non-transparent reference price display practices carry significant risks of fines. Traders must regularly review their promotional practices and internal control systems.

The HCA continues to pay special attention to this area, which is not limited to clothing products. In February 2026, the authority established an infringement by Mobilfox, and proceedings are currently ongoing regarding Decathlon's pricing practices. Furthermore, the HCA participated in a joint investigation (sweep) coordinated by the European Commission, during which at least 30 % of the 314 traders examined were found to have clearly displayed promotions in an unlawful and misleading manner. This may likewise lead to the initiation of further proceedings.