Case law

  • Case Details
    • National ID: 8465
    • Member State: Italy
    • Common Name:Soc. Westminster v. Graziana Bambini
    • Decision type: Other
    • Decision date: 25/09/1996
    • Court: Corte di cassazione (Supreme court)
    • Subject:
    • Plaintiff:
    • Defendant:
    • Keywords:
  • Directive Articles
    Doorstep Selling Directive, Article 1, 1.
  • Headnote
    1. The article 12 of the Law 15 January 1992, n. 50 provides that the judge of the place where the consumer is resident or domiciled is competent to decide the controversies arising from the contracts negotiated away from business premises.
    2. In the decision, the Corte di cassazione stated that this provision applies only to the contacts that have been concluded after the adoption of the Law 15 January 1992, n. 50.
  • Facts
    Westminster s.r.l. has obtained an injunction from the Pretore of Prato concerning the payment by Mrs. Graziana Bambini of a certain amount of money.
    As for the plaintiff, Mrs. Bambini should have paid to the company some lessons of English that have been taken by her daughter.
    Mrs. Graziana Bambini has opposed to the injunction, claiming that the two contracts she agreed on 25th March 1991 do not provide for the right of cancellation and that they were not in compliance with the provisions of the Directive 85/577/EEC of 20 December 1985.
    Westminster s.r.l. responded that the two contracts have been agreed before the implementation of the Directive 85/577/EEC in the Italian legal system (i.e. the Directive has been implemented with the adoption of the Law 15 January 1992, n. 50).
    The Pretore of Prato agreed on the argument of Mrs. Graziana Bambini and the plaintiff asked to the Corte di cassazione to define the judge competent to decide such controversy (i.e. Westminster s.r.l. asked for a “Regolamento di giurisdizione”).
  • Legal issue
    In this decision, the Corte di cassazione considered the direct effect of the Council Directive 85/577/EEC.
    The judges have denied such effect in accordance with the decision of the ECJ on 14th July 1994, Paola Faccini Dori v. Recreb S.r.l. on the on the interpretation of Council Directive 85/577/EEC to protect the consumer in respect of contracts negotiated away from business premises (OJ 1985 L 372, p. 31).
    The article 12 of the Law 15 January 1992, n. 50 provides that the judge of the place where the consumer is resident or domiciled is competent to decide the controversies arising from the contracts negotiated away from business premises.
    The Corte di cassazione has stated this mandatory jurisdiction applies only to the contracts concluded after the implementation of the Directive and, thus, after the adoption of the Law 15 January 1992, n. 50.
  • Decision

    Full text: Full text

  • Related Cases

    No results available

  • Legal Literature

    No results available

  • Result