Amazon Prime: BGH rejects price clause. Who can seek a refund?

What the BGH actually decided

Amazon increased the fees for existing Prime memberships in 2022. The dispute concerned its contractual terms and handling of that increase. According to the official press release, both Amazon’s appeal on points of law and the consumer organisation’s cross-appeal failed. In particular, the prohibition on the challenged clause remains in place.

The BGH focused on the unclear options available to customers: did they have to cancel to avoid the increase, or could they simply object and initially continue at the existing price? According to the release, this ambiguity breaches the transparency requirement. This is the reason reported by the BGH, not a general rule that subscription prices can never rise.

Why consent matters

The OLG Düsseldorf had already distinguished cancellation from an objection to new terms. Cancellation ends the contractual relationship. An objection to a change instead seeks continuation on the existing terms; possible termination by the provider is a separate question (paragraphs 67 to 72).

For an individual customer, simply having Prime is therefore not enough. Relevant questions include the agreed price, whether the membership already existed when the change occurred and whether a valid new price agreement was made later. A new contract, tariff change or express consent may alter the assessment. Continued payment should not be assumed to constitute valid consent without examining the circumstances.

How much could the difference be?

The standard annual membership increased from €69.00 to €89.90, a mathematical difference of €20.90 for each affected annual payment. For the standard monthly plan, the difference is €1.00 per affected payment, from €7.99 to €8.99. These amounts and the announced change from 15 September 2022 appear in the letter reproduced in the OLG judgment (paragraphs 16 and 34).

An arithmetic example, not a promise of entitlement: three affected annual payments produce a difference of €62.70. Whether the full amount can be recovered depends, among other things, on the contractual history, refunds already received and possible defences. Section 812(1) of the German Civil Code may provide a basis for repayment of sums paid without legal grounds. A calculator cannot replace that assessment.

Clause proceedings, collective action and individual claims

Today’s judgment does not pay out money to all Prime customers. Not all of the consumer organisation’s requests succeeded in the earlier proceedings; the requests concerning the specific implementation of the increase were no longer challenged on appeal (OLG, paragraphs 50 to 53 and 114). This is why review of contractual terms and an individual payment claim must be distinguished.

Separately, Verbraucherzentrale NRW is pursuing a collective action concerning the 2022 Prime price increase. Registration in the official claims register is an alternative to individual legal enforcement. An enquiry to our firm does not register you for that action. If you have already registered, tell us so that parallel steps can be coordinated.

The additional advertising on Prime Video and the fee for ad-free streaming from 2024 concern a different set of facts. That issue must not be confused with the increase in the Prime membership fee addressed here.

What to gather and have assessed now

Keep the original contract confirmation, the price-increase notice, affected invoices or payment records and correspondence with Amazon. Note plan changes, cancellations, refunds and any participation in the collective action. We do not need passwords or complete bank statements containing unrelated transactions.

Our Amazon Prime page guides you through these details and calculates the price difference you enter. For individual enforcement, we also consider cost-effectiveness: legal fees can be significant relative to a small claim. Reimbursement by Amazon or a legal expenses insurer is not automatic. The scope and fees must therefore be established before a paid engagement.

If a deadline may apply, do not simply wait for further news about the judgment. An enquiry to the firm does not itself preserve a deadline. Whether older payments are still recoverable requires an individual assessment.