A German court has ordered a cosmetic surgery clinic to stop using certain specialist titles after an AI chatbot on its website falsely stated that two doctors held formal specialist qualifications.
The Higher Regional Court of Hamm handed down the judgment in a case brought by consumer organisation Verbraucherzentrale Nordrhein-Westfalen against a cosmetic clinic that offers minimally invasive aesthetic treatments.
The case centred on a chatbot used on the clinic’s website for patient communication, appointment bookings and real-time responses to questions.
False specialist claims
According to the court, the chatbot was asked whether the clinic’s two doctor-managers were specialists in plastic and aesthetic surgery. It replied that they were ‘specialists in plastic and aesthetic surgery’ and had the necessary expertise and experience to perform aesthetic treatments.
In follow-up questions, the chatbot also described them as ‘specialists in aesthetic medicine’ and ‘specialists in aesthetic treatments’.
The court found those statements were false. The doctors did not hold specialist recognition in plastic and aesthetic surgery, plastic, reconstructive and aesthetic surgery, and the titles ‘specialist in aesthetic medicine’ and ‘specialist in aesthetic treatments’ do not exist under the relevant German framework.
After receiving a warning letter, the clinic deactivated the chatbot and later amended it using a prompt instruction and keyword filter so it would no longer make the disputed statements. However, it did not sign the requested cease-and-desist declaration.
Chatbot not treated as a third party
The court held that the chatbot’s statements amounted to misleading commercial acts by the company under Germany’s Act Against Unfair Competition.
It rejected the clinic’s argument that the chatbot’s responses should not be attributed to the business because the system operated autonomously and generated answers statistically, without individual human control.
The court said the chatbot was not a third party. It was a technical tool used by the business to communicate with potential customers and patients. The company remained responsible for how the chatbot was deployed on its website.
The judges also found that the company had sufficient control over the system, noting that it had been able to change the chatbot after the complaint so it no longer produced the false specialist-title claims.
The court said the ‘black box’ nature of AI did not change the legal position. Even where a chatbot answers questions without direct human input, the business has made the decision to use that system in its commercial communications.
Wider implications
The judgment also addressed the importance of practitioner qualifications in aesthetic medicine. The court said consumers considering cosmetic procedures have a strong interest in knowing whether treating doctors hold formal specialist qualifications, particularly given the potential consequences of poorly performed procedures.
While the ruling was made under German competition law, it is likely to attract attention beyond Germany as more aesthetic clinics use AI tools to manage patient enquiries, treatment information and website communications.
The judgment is not yet final, and the court has allowed an appeal to the German Federal Court of Justice. If appealed, the case will be one to watch for aesthetic medicine providers, particularly around how false or misleading chatbot statements are attributed to the businesses that use them.
