Pig suffering in focus: VGT is finally allowed to criticize SPAR!

Pig suffering in focus: VGT is finally allowed to criticize SPAR!

A sensational trial is imminent that will bring the practices of the food industry into the public eye. The retail giant SPAR filed a controversial lawsuit against the Association against Animal Factories (VGT) in July 2022. This lawsuit is part of a so-called SLAPP lawsuit (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation), which aims to silence critics. The interim injunction (EV), which was issued in the first two instances, prohibited the VGT from associating SPAR with the issue of pig suffering. However, this decision was greatly reduced by the Supreme Court (OGH), which only gave the VGT the opportunity to criticize SPAR's practices again after 1 ½ years ots.at reported.

The trial will continue at the Commercial Court in Vienna on January 20, 2025, at 11:30 a.m. He is accompanied by numerous witnesses from the VGT, including chairman DDr. Martin Balluch. The central question presented to the court is to what extent SPAR can be held responsible for what has been described as cruel pig suffering caused by the use of fully slatted floor farming. According to the OGH's conclusion, SPAR must not be released from responsibility, especially since it is one of the largest suppliers of pork in this form of farming. Loud vgt.at VGT sees SPAR as responsible and demands that critical voices about these practices be allowed to be heard again.

Current developments and reactions

The Supreme Court's decision is seen as a decisive step for the animal rights movement. GDR. Martin Balluch expressed relief at the lifting of SPAR's strict legal options and pointed out that retailers bear responsibility for the production conditions of their food. SPAR's argument that it does not keep animals and therefore cannot be held responsible for animal suffering was described as absurd. The VGT plans to continue to protest vehemently against SPAR and expects the injunction action to be heard in the near future. The trial will undoubtedly cause further controversy and is of great importance for the discourse on animal welfare and trade, with signs of a reorganization of the understanding of responsibility in the food trade becoming clear.