The football club FK Austria Wien sent out a newsletter by email on 17th May 2016 informing that it would be rebuilding the club's football stadium in the 10th district of Vienna, the Generali Arena. The financing of the new stadium was carried out, among other things, by means of crowdfunding under the Alternative Financing Act. In their newsletter, the football club informed about the investment possibilities and the corresponding rewards. Accordingly, investors with an investment of € 5,000 or more received, among other things, a ticket for the opening game of the Generali Arena 2018 and an exclusive stadium tour with Herbert Prohaska as a special additional bonus.
The plaintiff, represented by lawyer Balazs Esztegar, has been a fan of FK Austria Wien for more than 30 years and invested more than € 5,000 in the construction of the Generali Arena as part of the crowdfunding and thus acquired a right to attend the opening match and the stadium tour with Herbert Prohaska. These claims were also confirmed to the plaintiff by the board of FK Austria Wien.
Subsequently, however, the club banned the plaintiff from entering the premises of FK Austria Wien for a period of four years. The plaintiff was threatened with an injunction in the event of a violation of the ban.
The action brought by the plaintiff for toleration of participation in the opening match of the Generali Arena and in the guided tour of the stadium with Herbert Prohaska is directed against this. Due to the tight time frame and the threat of irreparable damage, the plaintiff combined his action with an application for an interim injunction.
The Vienna District Court for Commercial Matters granted the plaintiff's application and issued the interim injunction against FK Austria Wien. In its reasoning, the court stated that
the house ban precludes the plaintiff's right to participate, as the house ban also applies to the time of the opening match and the stadium tour.
Legally, in the court's opinion an interim injunction had to be issued, as otherwise there was a threat of irreparable damage under section 381 (2) of the Enforcement Law Act (EO). The damage to the plaintiff would be irreparable,
as the 2018 opening match and the stadium tour are tied to a fixed date and cannot be repeated. The payment of monetary compensation would by no means be fully adequate in the present case. Especially for a long-time football fan, the participation in a special football match (opening match) has a high immaterial value. The stadium tour with a famous former footballer is also a unique opportunity for most football fans.
The decision in the lawsuit itself is still pending.