Federal Court: Advertising with transport trailers next to highway illegal
An illegal advertising campaign using trailers along the highway is costing the operators of an internet portal dearly. The Federal Supreme Court upheld a ruling by the St. Gallen courts that imposed a 5,000-franc fine on the company’s managing director.
An illegal advertising campaign with transport trailers next to the highway is costing the operators of an Internet portal dearly. Since spring 2005, the managing director of a company in Wiler had had transport trailers set up at various locations in the canton of St. Gallen in the immediate vicinity of freeways and roads. They bore the address of the Internet portal he operated in large letters. The St. Gallen judiciary sentenced him to a fine of 5,000 Swiss francs for repeatedly displaying street advertising in contravention of the regulations.
The Federal Supreme Court has now dismissed his appeal. He had argued unsuccessfully that other advertising campaigns should also be affected by the ban, such as the "M" from McDonalds or the meadow advertising tolerated by the authorities, writes SDA on Monday. In addition, he had rented the trailers in question to third parties and was therefore not responsible for where they were placed.
According to the Federal Supreme Court, however, it is clear that the majority of the trailers were not redeemed and were set up for advertising purposes. The agreement with the tenants
was irrelevant under criminal law. With his actions, he had deliberately wanted to circumvent the law and simply used trailers instead of the usual partition walls.
The Federal Supreme Court has now dismissed his appeal. He had argued unsuccessfully that other advertising campaigns should also be affected by the ban, such as the "M" from McDonalds or the meadow advertising tolerated by the authorities, writes SDA on Monday. In addition, he had rented the trailers in question to third parties and was therefore not responsible for where they were placed.
According to the Federal Supreme Court, however, it is clear that the majority of the trailers were not redeemed and were set up for advertising purposes. The agreement with the tenants
was irrelevant under criminal law. With his actions, he had deliberately wanted to circumvent the law and simply used trailers instead of the usual partition walls.
