The Areios Pagos (Greek Supreme Court) proceeded on the basis that the standard terms and conditions used in a consumer contract are to be regarded as unfair if they disadvantage the consumer. Although not explicitly laid down in art 2 para 6 of Act 2251/94, the court should infer from the provision that the critical element is the question of whether the consumer is disadvantaged. Before scrutinising the contents of the STCs in accordance with the general clause in art 2 para 6 Act 2251/94, the Court of Appeal examined the question of whether the particular STCs contravened the interdictions on particular clauses specified in art 2 para 7 Act 2251/94. Any that do are to be regarded as ex lege invalid.
The Court of Appeal came to the conclusion that granting the operator an exclusive right to alter the service charges without any reference to the criteria according to which such changes applied was in breach both of art 2 para 6 and art 2 paras 7ε and 7ια of Act 2251/94. This was because such a right allowed the operator to alter the contract arbitrarily, without good reason and to the detriment of the consumer, which, in turn, was not in line with the requirements laid down in art 288 and 388 of the Greek Civil Code (ZGB). Rather, this right weakened the consumer’s legal position insofar as it made it impossible for him to calculate in advance the amount and scope of his financial obligations to the operator.
Furthermore, the court ruled that the term in the STCs relating to the consumer’s exercising of his right of cancellation was in breach of art 2 paras 6 and 7ιη of Act 2251/94. This was because it prevented the consumer from withdrawing from the contract without suffering considerable financial losses should the end price have risen appreciably in relation to the price agreed upon when the contract was signed.