Skip to content
Specialised in the care sector
Law & data protection

Legally Sound Care Website: Imprint and HWG

A complete imprint under the DDG, reachable in two clicks, plus the HWG limits on advertising claims for care services: how a care website becomes legally sound.

12 min read Pflege-WebsiteImpressumDDGHWGRechtssicherheit

For a care service, the website has long been the digital business card - and like any commercially operated site, it is subject to clear identification requirements. Since 14 May 2024, the German Digital Services Act (DDG) has applied, replacing the former Telemedia Act; the obligation to identify the provider is now set out in § 5 (Digital Services Act DDG). Anyone who, as a commercial provider, fails to keep a complete, easily findable imprint risks cease-and-desist warnings and a fine of up to 50,000 euros (Digital Services Act DDG). On top of this comes a second, often overlooked layer: as soon as a care website advertises with the recognition, elimination or alleviation of illnesses, the advertising restrictions of the Medicines Advertising Act (HWG) apply (Medicines Advertising Act HWG). This article shows which mandatory details a legally sound imprint contains, how it stays reachable in no more than two clicks and which statements about care and treatment services are permissible. Unlike data protection for forms, this is not about processing entered data but about identifying the provider and the limits of advertising.

Legally Sound Care Website: Imprint and HWGImprint: § 5 DDGName and address of the providerFast contact option, email addressRegister court and register numberVAT identification numberCompetent supervisory authorityAuthorised representativeAdvertising: HWG§ 1 covers claims about illnesses§ 3 no misleading efficacy claims§ 11 limits on public advertising§ 12 ad ban for certain illnessesFactual, not cure promisesUse verifiable statementsImprint easily recognisable, directly accessible and permanently available (§ 5 DDG)Home pageFooter linkImprintClick 1Click 2§ 5mandatory items under DDG2 clicksmax. depth to the imprint (BGH)50,000 €fine range under § 33 DDGDDG § 5 | Provider identification | HWG | Two-click rule | advertise lawfully

Key takeaways

  • Provider identification applies to every commercial operator, from home care services to day care and residential homes, even for plain information pages without a form. Since 14 May 2024 the basis is Section 5 of the Digital Services Act (DDG), not Section 5 TMG.
  • The imprint needs the provider's name and a physical address for legal notices, an email address for fast contact, the register court and number, the competent supervisory authority and any existing VAT identification number (IHK). The tax office number does not belong there.
  • The Federal Court of Justice accepted access via two links as sufficient (ref. I ZR 228/03). A clearly labelled footer link on every subpage meets that standard; an image-only reference or a PDF download does not.
  • Missing, incorrect or incomplete mandatory details are an administrative offence under Section 33 DDG carrying up to 50,000 euros (Digital Services Act DDG). More common than the fine is a warning letter from competitors or associations with standing (IHK).
  • As soon as a statement concerns recognising, removing or easing illness, the Medicines Advertising Act applies: Section 3 bans misleading efficacy claims, Section 11 limits advertising to the general public, Section 12 bars it for certain serious illnesses.
  • Factual wording stays permissible: treating chronic wounds to current professional standards instead of promising healing, naming staff qualifications instead of comparing yourself with other services. An imprint and careful copy replace no privacy policy.

Why an Imprint Is Mandatory Equipment

The imprint obligation applies to everyone who offers their digital services commercially and, as a rule, for payment (Digital Services Act DDG). A care service almost without exception falls under this: it provides paid services, uses the website to win patients and staff, and thus clearly acts commercially. Whether it is an outpatient service, day care or a residential facility makes no difference. Even a simple information page without a form is subject to the requirement as soon as it serves the business. The imprint is therefore not an annoying formality but the legally prescribed foundation of any serious care website.

What is new is above all the legal basis. The Telemedia Act, in which provider identification was previously governed by § 5 TMG, was repealed on 14 May 2024 and absorbed into the Digital Services Act (Digital Services Act DDG). In terms of content, the obligations have hardly changed, but the reference has to be correct: anyone who still speaks of mandatory details under § 5 TMG on their site should switch this to the DDG (IHK). An outdated legal reference is not a serious violation, but it looks unprofessional and is fixed with little effort. It is precisely such details that distinguish a well-kept site from a neglected one.

From the TMG to the DDG

The Digital Services Act replaced the Telemedia Act on 14 May 2024 (Digital Services Act DDG). Provider identification is now set out in § 5 DDG, and the content requirements remain essentially the same. Practical action needed: update the legal reference in the imprint and privacy policy from TMG to DDG.

The Mandatory Details § 5 DDG Requires

Under § 5 DDG, a service provider must keep a range of information easily recognisable, directly accessible and permanently available (Digital Services Act DDG). Which details are needed in an individual case depends on the legal form - a sole proprietorship names different details than a limited company. The following overview summarises the building blocks that usually come together on a care website. They should be complete, up to date and free of contradictions, because even a single missing detail can trigger a warning.

Name and Address

Full name of the provider and a physical address that can receive legal notices; for legal entities, also the legal form and the authorised representatives (Digital Services Act DDG). A mere PO box is not enough.

Fast Contact Option

Details enabling fast electronic contact, including an email address (Digital Services Act DDG). In practice a phone number belongs here too, so relatives can reach you directly.

Register and Register Number

If the care service is entered in the commercial, association or cooperative register, the register court and register number belong in the imprint (Digital Services Act DDG).

Supervisory Authority

If the activity requires official authorisation, the competent supervisory authority must be named (Digital Services Act DDG). For authorised care services this is a point worth checking.

VAT ID Number

An existing VAT identification number must be stated (IHK). Not every care service has one; if not, the detail is omitted, but it must not be invented.

Chamber and Professional Law

If those responsible belong to a regulated profession, the chamber, professional title and professional regulations must be named (Digital Services Act DDG). This concerns medically led structures more than pure care businesses.

For care services, two points deserve a closer look. First, the supervisory authority: anyone authorised under social law should check whether and how the competent body must be named in the imprint (Digital Services Act DDG). Second, the VAT identification number, which only has to be stated if it actually exists (IHK). Do not confuse it with the tax number from the tax office, which does not belong in the imprint. When in doubt, a leaflet from the local chamber of industry and commerce gives good initial guidance (IHK); the legally sound wording for the specific case is something we clarify as part of the data protection and legal advice for care.

Reachable in Two Clicks: Easily Recognisable and Permanently Available

A complete imprint is of little use if no one finds it. The law requires the details to be easily recognisable, directly accessible and permanently available (Digital Services Act DDG). What this means in practice was clarified early by the Federal Court of Justice: an imprint reachable via two links satisfies easy recognisability and direct accessibility (Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 20 July 2006, ref. I ZR 228/03). From this, the practical rule of thumb has developed that the imprint should be accessible from every subpage with no more than two clicks (IHK). The most reliable way to achieve this is a link clearly labelled Imprint in the footer, present on every page.

  • A clearly labelled Imprint link in the footer, visible on every subpage
  • Accessible in no more than two clicks from any page (Federal Court of Justice case law)
  • No hiding, such as only inside a graphic or deep within a menu
  • Clearly visible on mobile too, and easy to tap with a finger
  • As a readable HTML page, not only as a download in a PDF file
  • Legal reference to the DDG instead of the old TMG

Common Pitfall: the Hidden Imprint

An imprint reachable only via a contact form, behind several clicks or exclusively as a graphic does not meet the requirement of direct accessibility (Digital Services Act DDG). The label counts too: cryptic menu items instead of a clear Imprint link make it harder to find. A clearly visible footer link on every page is the easiest way to meet the requirements.

What a Faulty Imprint Costs

A missing, incomplete or incorrect imprint is no trivial matter. If the details required under § 5 DDG are intentionally or negligently not, not correctly or not completely kept available, this is an administrative offence under § 33 paragraph 2 of the Digital Services Act, which can be punished with a fine of up to 50,000 euros (Digital Services Act DDG). In practice, the real risk often comes from another direction: competitors and associations with standing can issue cease-and-desist warnings for violations of the imprint obligation, which entail costs and undertakings to refrain (IHK). For a care service that depends on trust, both are unpleasant - financially and for its reputation.

Small Effort, Big Difference

A correct imprint is created with manageable effort and protects against a fine range of up to 50,000 euros as well as against warnings (Digital Services Act DDG). At the same time it signals seriousness: anyone who discloses their provider details cleanly shows relatives and applicants that they work carefully - an impression that reaches far beyond mere compliance.

The Medicines Advertising Act on the Care Website

Besides provider identification, there is a second legal layer that is often overlooked on care websites: the Medicines Advertising Act (HWG). It applies to advertising for medicines, medical devices and other means, procedures, treatments and objects, insofar as the advertising statement refers to the recognition, elimination or alleviation of illnesses or morbid complaints (Medicines Advertising Act HWG). Exactly this reference is quickly established on care websites - for example, when you advertise wound care, diabetes support or the treatment of certain complaints. As soon as a statement is disease-related, you should know the limits of the HWG.

Three provisions are particularly relevant. § 3 HWG prohibits misleading advertising, in particular attributing a certain treatment success or making efficacy claims that do not match the established state of knowledge (Medicines Advertising Act HWG). § 11 HWG sets narrow limits on advertising to the general public - that is, outside expert circles - for example with certain images or recommendations (Medicines Advertising Act HWG). And § 12 HWG prohibits public advertising for the treatment of certain serious illnesses listed in an annex to the act (Medicines Advertising Act HWG). For the care website, this does not mean you have to conceal your services - but that you describe them factually and without exaggerated promises of a cure.

  • Describe services factually and verifiably instead of promising a certain success (Medicines Advertising Act HWG)
  • Avoid fear-based advertising and exaggerated before-and-after depictions (Medicines Advertising Act HWG)
  • Be especially restrained when advertising the treatment of serious illnesses to the public (Medicines Advertising Act HWG)
  • Name the qualification of the people involved instead of giving blanket efficacy promises
  • Clearly separate factual service information from promotional praise

Wording It Soundly: Permissible and Risky Statements

The difference between a risky and a legally sound statement rarely lies in the topic but in the wording. A factual service description is permitted and even desirable; only superlatives, unsubstantiated promises of success and blanket assurances of a cure become problematic. The following comparison shows, using typical examples, how the same service can be presented in a legally sound way - in line with the HWG and with general competition law, which requires verifiable statements (Medicines Advertising Act HWG).

TopicRisky statementLegally sound wording
Wound careWe heal every chronic woundWe treat chronic wounds professionally to current standards
Treatment successWe promise the improvement of your complaintsWe support you in everyday life and document the course
QualificationThe best care workers in the regionRegistered nursing professionals with relevant qualifications
DementiaWe stop the progression of dementiaWe support people with dementia and their relatives
ComparisonBetter than any other serviceAn overview of our services, so you can compare
EvidenceScientifically proven effectWe work according to recognised nursing standards

The legally sound version is not weaker but more credible. Relatives sense the difference between a serious description and an exaggerated promise. How to present services clearly yet precisely is also taken up in the article on the structured build of a care service website. And because images work just as words do, it is worth looking at real photos instead of staged stock images: here, too, authentic, traceable depictions create more trust than embellished effects. Finally, solid local search optimisation ensures the visibility of your cleanly worded pages.

Imprint, Data Protection and Content as a Package

Legal soundness on a care website has several building blocks that interlock. Provider identification under the DDG and the advertising restrictions of the HWG, which this article is about, concern the presentation of the provider and the limits of advertising. This should be distinguished from data protection: how contact and application forms process sensitive health data is covered in the separate article on privacy-compliant forms on the care website. Added to this are the statutory accessibility requirements and up-to-date professional content - for example the new powers from the 2026 Nursing Competence Act, which also have to be worded in a legally sound way.

In practice, it is worth looking at these building blocks together rather than retrofitting each point individually. An imprint, a matching privacy policy and legally sound service texts are best created together with the presentation of services and the career page. Anyone modernising an existing site ideally clarifies these questions in the course of a structured relaunch; the statutory accessible design under the BFSG belongs to it just as much. From more than 50 website projects (project experience) we know that the greatest effort rarely lies in the technology but in the clean alignment of content, details and the actual legal situation. Reliable operation with up-to-date legal references is ensured through ongoing maintenance. For an initial, non-binding assessment of your site, feel free to get in touch via the contact form.

A legally sound imprint is not a legal accessory but the first signal that a care service works carefully and transparently.

Guiding principle of legally sound care websites

Sources and Studies

This article is based on data and information from: the German Digital Services Act (DDG, in particular § 5 provider identification and § 33 penalty provisions, in force since 14 May 2024), the Medicines Advertising Act (HWG, in particular §§ 1, 3, 11 and 12), the Federal Court of Justice (judgment of 20 July 2006, ref. I ZR 228/03, on the accessibility of provider identification) and leaflets and information from the chambers of industry and commerce (IHK) on the imprint obligation. This article does not replace individual legal advice; details marked with (project experience) are based on our own website projects for the care sector.

Related Articles