Judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) dated June 8th, 2023 – Marketer is a consumer and is entitled to a refund! 

Representatives of the European Commission, the Italian, and Romanian governments have achieved an extensive decision at the ECJ! 

For many years, the lawyers of Hubert Freidl’s Lyoness have argued that all marketers are independent entrepreneurs and therefore not entitled to a refund. 

After hundreds of rulings in Austria, the ECJ (European Court of Justice) has, for the first time in Case C-455/21, with the decision dated June 8th, 2023, sent a clear and international signal! 

During the hearing, in addition to the Chamber President himself, three other judges were responsible for the decision. 

Written statements were submitted for the formation of the judgment by: 

  • Representatives of Lyoness Europe AG, 
  • The Romanian government, represented by E. Gane and L. Liţu as representatives, 
  • The Italian government, represented by G. Palmieri as a representative, assisted by G. Greco, Avvocato dello Stato, and 
  • The European Commission, represented by A. Boitos and N. Ruiz García as representatives. 

After hearing the Advocate General, the decision was issued. 

The judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) – Fifth Chamber – dated June 8th, 2023, clarified significant questions regarding consumer protection and the interpretation of Directive 93/13/EEC. It takes a detailed look at the business practices of Lyoness, also known as Lyconet and myWorld, and its potential classification as a pyramid scheme. 

This article aims to explain the Lyoness judgment and its implications for those affected. 

What is Directive 93/13/EEC (European Economic Community) – Consumer Protection in the EU?  

Directive 93/13/EEC aims to protect consumers from abusive clauses in consumer contracts. It defines a consumer as a natural person acting outside their professional or business activity. A clause that has not been individually negotiated is considered abusive if it creates a significant imbalance in the rights and obligations of the parties to the contract. 

In the case of Lyoness, the business model, which includes cashback and network marketing, had been assessed differently in various countries, with classifications as a pyramid scheme also made. However, members of the cashback and network marketing scheme were quickly introduced to other business areas and labeled as “marketers,” implying a form of self-employment. 

This case is the basis for the ECJ judgment: Mechanical Engineer vs. Lyoness Europe AG 

The plaintiff, a mechanical engineer without commercial or professional business activity, entered into a membership contract with Lyoness Europe. This system offers members discounts and other benefits when shopping with affiliated merchants and allegedly provides passive income. He challenged several clauses of the membership contract as “abusive” and brought the case to court. 

The crucial question was: Who is a consumer, and what defines them as such? 

The core issue in this case revolves around the question of who qualifies as a “consumer” under the European directive. The plaintiff argued that he was a consumer because he did not engage in commercial or professional activity within the system. Lyoness Europe, on the other hand, argued as usual that the plaintiff engaged in economic activity within the system. 

However, the ECJ clarified in favor of the plaintiff: 

Customers of Lyoness are only not considered consumers when their relationship with Lyoness can be attributed to their general commercial or professional activity.” 

The Lyoness Judgment: What Was Decided? 

The ECJ made the following essential decisions regarding the interpretation of Directive 93/13/EEC and the definition of a “consumer”: 

  • The decision regarding whether the plaintiff can be considered a “consumer” is admissible. 
  • Directive 93/13 grants protection to all consumers, regardless of whether the law of a third country applies to the contract. 
  • The court emphasized that the protection under the directive assumes that the consumer is in a weaker negotiating position compared to the trader. 
  • Whether a person is considered a “consumer” must be examined by the national court, considering whether the contractual relationship is outside of a commercial or professional activity. 
  • Finally, the court determined that a person does not lose their status as a “consumer” solely by receiving certain benefits. 

What Does the Lyoness Judgment Mean for Those Affected? 

The Lyoness judgment has significant implications for those affected and strengthens the allegations brought forward. It further emphasizes consumer protection and makes it clear that a person does not lose their status as a “consumer” solely by receiving benefits. This means that those affected who feel vulnerable in their relationship with Hubert Freidl’s company receive significant legal support. It is important to note that the judgment also has implications for marketers’ ability to reclaim their contributions. 

In Conclusion: 

The Lyoness judgment is a crucial milestone in the interpretation of Directive 93/13/EEC and the definition of a “consumer.” It emphasizes consumer protection and is likely to serve as a basis for future judgments. However, it also highlights the importance of those affected seeking information when faced with questions or uncertainties. 

Hubert Freidl’s long-standing facade of success has significantly deteriorated since the announcement of his company’s IPO. What he has always needed was “paying consumers” that his lawyers legally classified as “entrepreneurs,” a practice that persisted for far too long due to a slow-moving judiciary. 

Our advice to all those affected: Act now! 

“The myWorld shareholder is, in fact, being involved with their own capital” – What the “fake shareholder” should talk about with his upline.  

Many of the Lyconet marketers waited for almost two days at the “Sensation” in Gelsenkirchen on July 7th & 8th, 2023 for the big IPO. Finally, Hubert Freidl announced within 3 minutes and 20 seconds “As of now you are all shareholders” which could also mean “I screwed you up yet again!”   

Since this event, marketers have split into two camps. Into those who only needed the final proof of having been screwed and those who don’t have the slightest idea of how an IPO works and cheered the community on once again.  

Even if we are attacked by so-called top leaders, none of the self-described stock market experts around myWorld can or want to argue against the facts stated below.

Because the following is simply facts, which is easy to see if you take a good look at the agreements and T&C’s and don’t believe everything your upline says: 

In June 2018, it all started with the Enterprise Cloud program: marketers were to convert their Customer Clouds into Enterprise Cloud 1 with an upcharge of one-third of the value of each cloud. This Enterprise Cloud 1 deal was pushed to investors because they could now engage in the revenue of not just customers in certain countries, but globally. To motivate this conversion, the upcharge to Enterprise Cloud 1 was “rewarded” with double SP. It was also conveyed that the old Customer Clouds would lose their value.   

The background, however, is that Lyoness Europe AG did not want to distribute the customer clouds or pay back the invested capital. With the imposed Enterprise Cloud deal and the promise that the investors would now even participate in the worldwide purchase revenues, it was able to get the majority of the investors to convert their Clouds, whereby they even received further payments for the “upgrade” and was able to keep the money for another 4 years, until October 2022, just when Enterprise Cloud 1 should have started distributing. In parallel, it could continue to gain the payments of € 50.00 per month required for the right of disposal. This is how Lyoness Europe AG has always handled it: instead of paying out the promised profits and repaying the invested capital, it always created new fantasy products that were even better and more advantageous and with which one could compensate for their losses. After all, except for recruitment commissions, marketers could not gain any profits within this system.   

Source: Lyconet

According to the FAQ for the myWorld Share Program, the member receives myWorld Share Points (mSP) for all previous orders (Discount Voucher, mVoucher, Benefit Voucher), and 1 euro order value corresponds to one mSP. With the conversion, all investments were also credited to the member account, the Shopping Points granted for them were shown as myWorld Share Points, and the purchased clouds were transferred to the new myWorld Share Cloud. The myWorld Share Points were intended to entitle members to shares in the Group’s planned IPO.   

The discount vouchers have now become mVouchers, although apart from the slightly similar name, there is no difference at all. The additional conditions for discount vouchers 2017 and the additional conditions for the purchase of mVouchers 2019 are identical in content. So, it seems that all the PB Clouds and payments for discount vouchers still purchased from Lyoness Europe AG appear.   

Source: Lyconet

These facts are clear evidence that a contract takeover took place because the Discount Vouchers are distributed exclusively by Lyoness Europe AG and the mVouchers exclusively by myWorld Austria GmbH. Since the contractual relationship with Lyoness Europe AG was dissolved and was taken over by Lyconet Austria GmbH and myWorld Austria GmbH, the Discount Vouchers that were taken over inevitably had to be converted or renamed to mVouchers.   

Although it was promised beforehand by Hubert Freidl himself, in all advertising mails and in the FAQ’s to be accepted during the changeover and in the Fact Sheet for the myWorld Share Program, that all orders would be taken over, Lyconet and myWorld denied this fact in the proceedings before the District Court for Commercial Matters Vienna to 9 C 234/2023k. Thus, it is obvious that the members who made the switch to the myWorld Share Program were presumably deceived.   

Source: Lyconet

In all advertising measures, the impression was deliberately created that members would receive shares in the share program “completely free of charge” for all bookings (“I have a gift for you!”) and that they would receive shares as a gift for all their payments made to date.   

However, participation in the share program is not free at all; instead, investors are required to make minimum monthly payments, as they have been in the past. As with Enterprise Clouds, members must be active, which means they must make at least one monthly product order, because otherwise no distributions from the myWorld Share Cloud are possible.   

The fact sheet for the myWorld Share Program states!

Requirements for receiving CP from the myWorld Share Cloud:

“To receive CP from the myWorld Share Cloud, marketers must have been active for a certain period. A marketer is considered active if he or she has placed at least one monthly product order.”  

These ‘products’ are, worthless vouchers (Benefit Vouchers, Shopping Point Packs) because, according to the T&Cs of Purchasing and Ordering and Terms of Use of myWorld Benefit Vouchers and the T&Cs of Purchasing and Ordering and Terms of Use of Shopping Point Packs, they cannot be used to make purchases at all.   

Instead of Shopping Points (SP), Career Points (CP) are now traded. A Benefit Voucher costs at least € 49.00, so at least € 49.00 per month must still be paid into the system to be entitled to those shares. The higher the payment, the more CP is generated and therefore the profit should be higher, because the compensation is calculated based on the CP.  

As it has now turned out, the propagated IPO was just a marketing lie to induce gullible investors to make the switch, so that they forgo their enterprise clouds in favor of mSP. The promised listed shares do not exist at all and the myWorld Share Points have no value at all, so that the money of the marketers is obviously seeping away in the fundraising model of Lyconet and myWorld without any consideration, and a total loss is being suffered.   

Contrary to the announcements, no quoted shares are issued, but only registered shares with restricted transferability of myWorld International AG; there is no secondary market at all.   

In addition, the documents (FAQ and Fact Sheet for the myWorld Share Program) promise that the members can freely sell 50% of the shares. However, it turns out that the sale is only allowed with the consent of myWorld International AG.   

Since the registered shares with restricted transferability may only be sold with the consent of myWorld International AG, the capital is still tied up and even in the event of a total loss, the “shareholder” has no claim to reimbursement, or at least that seems to be the plan!   

Plus: it was kept secret for a long time from which group the investors were to receive their shares, especially since in all documents only “myWorld International” was mentioned.   

Finally, it was revealed that shares of myWorld International AG were to be received. At the extraordinary shareholders’ meeting on May 26th, 2023, myWorld 360 AG (FN 389134g, formerly Lyoness Cashback AG, Lyoness Group AG, mWS myWorld Solutions AG) was renamed myWorld International AG. Subsequently, a capital increase from originally € 100,000.00 to € 12,000,000.00 was successively agreed upon. Since this capital does not originate from a real business activity, it is presumably the money of the investors, which was distributed via various channels from Lyoness Europe AG first to myWorld Austria GmbH and then to myWorld 360 AG. In effect, the investors will be involved with their own capital, but most of this has probably already been consumed by the leadership.

The conversion to the myWorld Share Program was the final scam to protect themselves in the best possible way against claims in the event of a total loss. The myWorld Share Program is used by those who have already been reported to the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office for White‐Collar Crime and Corruption, exclusively to trick unsuspecting investors and to enrich themselves unlawfully.   

The decision-makers at Lyconet and myWorld apparently created a cunning construct to trick the investors out of their money, to take over the well-paying members of Lyoness Europe AG and to urge them to switch to new contractual partners. They thereby created, among the investors, the now disputed impression that their contractual relationship, along with all previously made investments, would be assumed by the new contracting parties. 

Despite promises to the contrary, the parties responsible now claim in bad faith that they are neither liable for the previous payments to Lyoness Europe AG nor that they have anything to do with Lyoness. 

Instead of constantly criticizing us for the clarification, those responsible should explain these facts. In recent years, they have often been invited by TV stations such as ORF, ZDF, 3Sat to explain themselves, but they have never complied.  

Shame on you, leaders!

Shame on you and explain to the marketers how it really is.

Even in court, experts were always named as witnesses, but they never actually appeared. They are stalling for time and when the judge has had enough, they simply withdraw the lawsuit.

That’s the way it’s always been, isn’t it, Mr. Freidl? 

Freidl’s IPO exposed: when accounts are suddenly blocked! 

Would you be okay with your bank canceling your bank account, blocking access, and refusing to release your balance, all because you have concerns about a transaction? Of course, a bank can cancel an account, but the balance is still paid out. 

Right – the translation of the letter

Hubert Freidl’s system does itself no favors by immediately denying access to their marketers’ accounts just because they have legitimate doubts about this IPO and want to reverse the stock swap. MyWorld International goes even further, stating that there would be no claim for the money already deposited. 

Regardless of how much money has already been deposited, as soon as it becomes clear that the marketer has seen through the system and is no longer being appeased by their upline or believes in new promises, the true face of Lyoness/Lyconet/myWorld is revealed. 

We extensively documented the questionable and allegedly coerced KYC process on July 13th, 2023, to which myWorld International AG reacted peeved, which is hardly surprising when caught with the proverbial “hand in the cookie jar.” 

Hubert Freidl advertised his IPO with “I have a gift for you,” claiming his stocks were a gift, an incentive, but for what? The incentive to devalue the money already paid in? 

Right – the translation of the letter

With a termination, you receive your Sharepoints in exchange for returning the shares, but the only purpose of the Sharepoints was to convert them into shares, so there are no further uses.  

However, myWorld conveniently ignores that Sharepoints were only granted for actual and effective payments because this would confirm payments made by the members again, something myWorld International AG or, in this case, Lyconet mSP GmbH (formerly Lyconet Promotion GmbH), would very much like to avoid. 

Hubert Freidl’s companies naturally want nothing to do with each other when it gets tough, so they refer to the general terms and conditions and claim, in essence: “It’s written there, you don’t get your money back!” 

However, what we have all learned in recent years, and as is evident from the legally binding judgments, the respective terms and conditions and agreements have been declared NULL and VOID. The legal system cannot keep up with the new “rules and conditions” that Hubert Freidl and his leaders came up with. In the end, nothing changes, and it’s only a matter of time before these are once again classified as invalid. 

Recommendation: 

  • Definitely take a screenshot of your Lyconet/myWorld account! 
  • Collect bank transfer receipts to the Lyoness/Lyconet/myWorld accounts! 
  • Document communication with your upline (date, time, content) using a memory log! 
  •  

In the next post, we will show you why you are only a “fake shareholder” without rights at myWorld International AG! 

GSPartners and cooperation partner of Karatbars is blocked by METAMASK: Observers and authorities warn against Ponzi scheme!

MetaMask is a self-custodial wallet for Defi, Web3 Dapps and NFTs that offers security features to protect digital assets. The application, encryption and protection against phishing attacks makes MetaMask a safe place to manage crypto investments. As a result, operators arguably have no problem removing online scams from their platform, as was the case most recently with three domains (g999.io/g999main.net/gspartners.global) belonging to GS-Partners.   

According to online platforms, a Security Engineer under the username “legobeat” requested on August 4th of this year that GS-Partners be added to Metamask’s blocklist. The moderator justified his request by saying that GS-Partners was selling false dreams and falsely claiming to be a PIVX author. Support Product Lead Alex Herman granted this request one day later.   

On the same day, GS-Partners protested the blocking under the username “gspdevelopment” and asked for it to be lifted on the grounds that “GSPartners.global” was a legitimate and registered marketing platform. Five days later, Alex Herman announced that the blocking of the domains would not be lifted after further investigation. Later, Herman let another user know that the blocking was explicitly due to “nefarious activity.”   

GS-Partners’ objections are demonstrably incorrect: 

Last year, for example, the Central Bank of the Comoros warned of misrepresentations about regulatory approval for offshore banking transactions by the main company GSB Gold Standard Bank.   

Earlier this year, the Autorite des Marches Financiers

Quebec warned of securities fraud on the part of

GSPartners, in the same month the Alberta Securities

Commission added GSTrade and G999 to its Investment

Caution List and shortly thereafter also GSPartners, due to

securities fraud.   

In addition, there was a warning from the British Columbia

Securities Commission for securities fraud for: GSPartners,

GSB Gold Standard Pay Ltd, GSB Gold Standard Bank

Ltd, Gold Standard Trade, Lydian World, G999, GSTrade

and Swiss Valorem Bank.   

On top of that the Ontario Securities Commission imposed

a securities fraud warning on GSPartners and Swiss

Valorem Bank. 

Not only in Canada, but also in the U.S., GS-Partners is

allegedly violating the law, since there seems to be no

registration with either the SEC or any U.S. state securities

regulator. 

Lyconet: September looks… complicated! 

In a pyramid scheme, you get benefits from recruiting other marketers and getting them to spend money in the scheme as well. In the Lyconet September Outlook, Peter Gruber talks about how Lyconet marketers can recieve their so-called benefits and as always, it’s not all that straightforward:    

In a pyramid scheme, you get benefits from recruiting other marketers and getting them to spend money in the scheme as well. In the Lyconet September Outlook, Peter Gruber talks about how Lyconet marketers can recieve their so-called benefits and as always, it’s not all that straightforward:    

First of all, you need three direct marketers who have ordered and paid for a monthly SP pack, or have active status. This only gives you Shopping Points (SP) and mSP Asia, which in turn will only become relevant when the myWorld Asia IPO takes place, which is supposedly in 2024, but we already know the game with their “IPOs” and their “company shares”. If this IPO works out in the same way as the one in Gelsenkirchen at the beginning of July this year,more marketers are to be pitied. In addition they are very  particular that payments must be on time and one should remind their Downline of that too, if neccessary. Nobody can forget now anyways since a specifically developed “notification system” was made available, in which one can control their Marketers more eficiently and if necessary collection activity is to be exercised, so more money can be flushed into the system.   

Peter Gruber also talks about building a “stable business” with the marketers and their downlines’ shopping volumes. As another “source of income” he mentions Direct Commission and Career Points. The Direct Commission is not, as the name should actually reveal, a direct bonus in the form of actual money, but is again simply a distribution of fantasy points, which can then be converted into “company shares” (we avoid the word stock) in the internal system. However, this process is again bound to predetermined rules, restrictions and regulations.  

Since the last “IPO” took place almost two months ago and

the marketers were once again successfully lead on, money

can finally be collected yet again via Lyconet, because

THIS is how they ACTUALLY earn money.  

Call – Where is Hubert Freidl? Mail cannot be delivered.

Since we filed our complaint in November of 2022, we as BE-EEIG, several lawyers and courts, have tried in vain to serve Mr. Hubert Freidl, founder of Lyoness/Lyconet/myWorld, with documents concerning the case.  

Especially since these deliveries are exclusively returned with the note “unknown recipient” or “recipient moved”. Hubert Freidl has not been registered in Monaco since the EEIG filed the complaint. In addition, we have received information that Freidl now resides in South America and is only occasionally in Europe. He had flown in particularly for the event in Gelsenkirchen to applaud his marketers for two days and to sell the absurd IPO to the audience in just three minutes.   

A summonable address also matters to us, as we attach importance to Mr. Freidl being able to comment on the accusations against him and his companies and that he is being given the chance to explain himself.    

We are grateful for any information on the current whereabouts of Hubert Freidl, or his current residential address.   

Contact:  

[email protected] or [email protected]   

Attention: The presumption of innocence applies until the allegations have been clarified!