Portalul european e-justiție - Jurisprudenţă
Închide

VERSIUNEA BETA A PORTALULUI ESTE ACUM DISPONIBILĂ!

Accesați versiunea BETA a portalului european e-justiție și spuneți-ne cum vi se pare!

 
 

Cale de navigare


menu starting dummy link

Page navigation

menu starting dummy link

Detalii privind cazul

Detalii privind cazul
ID național High Court of Cassation and Justice, Judgment 1955
Statul membru România
Denumire comună N/A
Tipul de decizie Decizie a Curții de Justiție
Data deciziei 22/11/2016
Instanţa High Court of Cassation and Justice
Obiect
Reclamantul
Pârâtul
Cuvinte-cheie civil liability, misleading advertising, general civil proceedings, special administrative proceedings

Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 5 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 7 Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, Article 7

A dispute between 2 companies regarding the civil liability of one of them following an advertising campaign alleged illegal (as misleading).

A dispute between 2 companies regarding the civil liability of one of them following an advertising campaign alleged illegal (as misleading).

Misleading advertising campaign.

The Court in the first instance accepted the existence of an illicit act, but since the claimant did not prove the fulfilment of the other conditions required for the civil liability of the defendant, the claim was rejected. Both the claimant and the defendant lodged an appeal, which was dismissed by the Court of Appeal (Court of Appeal Bucharest, Civil section V, civil decision no 659, of 23 April 2015). Again, both the claimant and the defendant lodged a recourse (appeal on points of law) before the Supreme Court, which was also dismissed. The Supreme Court discussed, among other aspects, the applicability of the Law 158/2008. It stated that in case of illegal advertising, the “victim” has two alternatives: it may opt for the special administrative proceedings regulated by the Law 158/2008, or for the general provisions from the Civil Code on extra-contractual liability. Given the fact that the provisions of the Law 158/2008 have a special (and derogative) character, they may be applied only in the limits and in the framework established for the derogatory administrative proceedings. The court then states that when the claimant opts for the general judicial proceedings (asking for damages for unlawful conduct), he is obliged to prove the fulfilment of the requirements set by the Civil Code for this, including the proof of the prejudice suffered.

The more favourable provisions of the Law 158/2008 are applicable only in so far as if the claimant followed the administrative procedure, but not in the case of judiciary proceedings for civil liability. The judges may take into consideration the Law 158/2008 when establishing the illicit character of the conduct (Law which set the standards in the matter); but for the civil liability to be incurred, the claimant must also prove the other conditions set by the Civil Code in this regard (the prejudice and the relation of causality between the illicit act and the prejudice suffered).

Text integral: Text integral

Nu există rezultate disponibile

Nu există rezultate disponibile

Appeals from both, plaintiff and defendant, were dismissed. This is a final judgment.