Съдебна практика

  • Данни за случая
    • Национален идентификатор: Supreme Court of Cassation, Judgement 190/2019
    • Държава-членка: България
    • Общоприето наименование:N/A
    • Вид решение: Решение на върховния съд
    • Дата на решението: 16/12/2019
    • Съд: Върховен касационен съд
    • Заглавие:
    • Ищец:
    • Ответник:
    • Ключови думи: collective action, misleading commercial practices
  • Членове от директивата
    Injunctions Directive, Article 2, 1., (a)
  • Уводна бележка

    It is admissible to bring an action for recognition establishing that a trader applies unfair / misleading / commercial practice, provided that the Consumer Protection Act regulates actions for cessation of violations of consumer rights, and the declaratory claims for violated collective interests are only regulated  in the Civil Procedure Code.

  • Факти

    The dealer Medico Plus 1 Ltd. applies misleading commercial practices by sending brochures to consumers, encouraging them to participate in promotions and offering them free products depicted in the brochures. In fact, some of the products shown are only available for a fee.

    The Consumer Protection Commission is taking collective action to establish that this commercial practice is unfair.

  • Правен въпрос

    Is it admissible to file a collective claim to establish a violation of law / declaratory action, based on art. 186, para. 1 of the Consumer Protection Act which only regulates claims for suspension and prohibition of commercial practices, which are convicting claims?

  • Решение

    The Consumer Protection Commission is entitled to file a declaratory action for the recognition that a trader applies unfair commercial practice on the grounds of art. 379, para. 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, to which art. 186, para. 1 of the Consumer Protection Act refers. For this reason, the declaratory collective action brought by the Consumer Protection Commission is admissible and must be considered by the Court.

    URL: http://www.vks.bg/pregled-akt?type=ot-delo&id=058AE3CEF3700E3CC22584D2003FCD0A

    Пълен текст: Пълен текст

  • Свързани случаи

    Няма налични резултати

  • Правна литература

    Няма налични резултати

  • Резултат
    The Supreme Court of Cassation upheld the decision of the Second Instance Court, rejected the defendant's objection that the established declaratory action was inadmissible and found that the defendant applied misleading commercial practice in its activity.