Austria: OGH Decisions on Telecom Fees

Feb 19, 2026 Benn-Ibler Rechtsanwälte

The Austrian Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof, hereinafter OGH) has recently reviewed a clause about processing fees in a telecom company’s general terms and conditions. The court also sent questions regarding activation fees to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for clarification through a preliminary ruling.

The plaintiff is a public-law corporation seeking an injunction; the defendant is an Austrian telecom company.

The class action addresses the legitimacy of a provision within the telecommunications company’s general terms and conditions requiring customers to pay an activation fee. Additionally, it challenges the validity of a clause permitting the company to impose a processing fee in cases where payment cannot be collected due to reasons attributable to the customer.

Request for preliminary ruling on activation fees

The OGH submitted a preliminary ruling request to the ECJ concerning activation fees. The court inquired, among other points, whether Articles 102(3)(c) and A.2 of Annex VIII to Directive 2018/1972/EU should be interpreted as conferring upon telecommunications providers the authority to establish ‘prices for the activation of electronic communications services’ within their general terms and conditions and fee schedules as consideration from customers.

Transparen processing fees

With respect to the processing fee incurred for unsuccessful collection attempts attributable to the customer, the OGH provided the following statement:

The reference within the clause to ‘reasons for which the consumer is responsible’ does not detract from its transparency. While the clause does not explicitly address whether fault is required, an average customer can reasonably interpret it as pertaining to matters within their scope of control. The requirement to draft the clause in clear and understandable terms is limited to what is feasibly achievable. Utilising phrasing that is customary in everyday speech and frequently employed by both national and EU legislators is ordinarily sufficient, even if individual scenarios are not specifically enumerated.

OGH 3 Ob 169/25m, 27 January 2026