In November 2012, UPC Hungary Ltd. issued a notification to its subscribers regarding changes in services. The notification included a legal statement informing subscribers on UPC’s proposal to enter into new agreements with the same content as the existing ones. According to UPC’s notification, the effective agreements would be terminated, and the new agreements would be agreed to by the implicit consent of the subscribers. This would mean that unless otherwise stated by an undetermined deadline, any action of the subscriber regarding the service (e.g. using the service, paying the respective invoice) would be considered as agreeing to UPC’s abovementioned proposal.
The NRA commenced an official investigation against UPC to determine whether the service provider was in breach of applicable infocommunications law by proposing the termination of and reentering into subscriber agreements via implicit consents. In addition, the Media and Infocommunications Commissioner (whose procedure is independent from that of the NRA, though he is an integral part of the NRA) also launched a review procedure to determine the possible harm caused to subscribers by this proposal. As a conclusion, the Commissioner entered into a bilateral, officially non-binding agreement with UPC to remedy any possible harms by specifying the terms and conditions of objecting UPC’s proposal. These include the means and deadline of submitting the objection to UPC. However, this bilateral agreement only contains the voluntary undertakings of UPC, and does not restrict the NRA in continuing its official procedure against UPC.