App-only discounts face legal challenge as German consumer watchdog sues Penny
Consumer watchdog sues Penny over app-only discounts, arguing they exclude older and disabled shoppers; courts to decide on discrimination and data concerns.
The German consumer association (Vzbv) has launched legal action against discount supermarkets over app-only discounts, arguing that price cuts available exclusively to smartphone app users unlawfully exclude some shoppers. The dispute centres on examples such as lower advertised prices for spreads and chocolates that are only applied when customers present a virtual loyalty card through a retailer’s app. The lawsuits, brought against chains including Penny, Lidl and previously Netto, raise questions about equal access to everyday savings and the role of personal data in promotional pricing.
Penny’s pricing practices at the center of the dispute
A central claim in the Vzbv case highlights that identical products carry different prices for customers who scan a virtual card in the Penny app versus those who do not, creating what the watchdog describes as a two-tier pricing system. Consumer advocates point to marketing materials showing steep discounts for app users — discounts that shrink or disappear entirely for shoppers who do not use the app for reasons of age, disability or choice. Penny has defended its approach as a legitimate marketing tool, insisting the app is voluntary and widely used, while the Vzbv says exclusive app prices effectively bar some consumers from the lowest advertised offers.
Legal arguments and discrimination claims under German law
The Vzbv argues that app-only discounts contravene the Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz (AGG), Germany’s general equal treatment law, when applied to mass-market transactions for everyday goods. The association’s legal team contends that excluding people who cannot or do not use smartphone apps — particularly on account of age or disability — amounts to an unlawful disadvantage in routine purchases. Retailers counter that the promotions are lawful commercial practices designed to reward registered customers and that alternatives, such as paper coupons or in-store offers, are available to non-users.
Court timetable and recent rulings in related cases
Judges at several regional courts have already grappled with similar challenges, producing mixed outcomes that have left the ultimate legal question unresolved. One higher regional court rejected the Vzbv’s claim against a rival discounter earlier this year, finding that app-based price benefits were permissible and noting that some app features could even aid groups like the visually impaired. Other proceedings remain pending at different Oberlandesgerichte (higher regional courts), and the association’s litigation strategy aims to bring the issue before the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) for a definitive ruling on whether app-only discounts are compatible with anti-discrimination law.
Retailers’ defense and industry perspective
Discount chains and the retail industry trade body argue that apps are simply another channel to reach customers and that targeted offers reflect competitive marketing rather than illegal exclusion. Representatives note the high penetration of smartphones and point to millions of registered app users who receive personalised deals, loyalty points and convenience features as part of voluntary participation. Trade group spokespeople also say that retailers offer other promotional formats and that apps help tailor offers to customer needs, a capability they view as necessary in a fiercely competitive market where margins and consumer preferences move quickly.
The digital divide and consumer impacts on vulnerable groups
The Vzbv highlights national statistics showing that a non-negligible share of older adults have limited or no internet experience and that smartphone ownership is lower in some demographics, creating a genuine risk of exclusion from advertised savings. Advocacy lawyers warn that when price differentials for staple goods become contingent on technology use, low-income and less tech-savvy shoppers can lose out at a time when household budgets are under pressure. Consumer groups are pressing retailers to provide equal-value alternatives that do not require app registration, or at minimum to ensure that app promotions are mirrored by accessible paper-based or on-premises options.
Data-exchange for discounts: transparency and consent questions
Beyond access, the litigation touches on the exchange of personal data for commercial benefit, with the Vzbv calling for clearer disclosure about what customers “pay” in personal information when they accept app terms to obtain discounts. Surveys cited by consumer advocates suggest many app users made additional purchases influenced by in-app deals, a dynamic that raises concerns about inducement and the commercial use of purchasing profiles. The association is therefore seeking not only equal access to price reductions but also greater transparency about data practices, arguing that marketing offers should not obscure the value extracted from user information.
The litigation over app-only discounts could set a significant precedent for how everyday retail promotions are structured and regulated in Germany, potentially affecting loyalty schemes, personalised pricing and the use of customer data across the sector. As regional courts weigh competing legal and policy considerations, the industry and consumer groups alike are preparing for an eventual decision from the Federal Court of Justice that will clarify whether retailers must offer equivalent, accessible alternatives to app-based savings.
