Case law

  • Case Details
    • National ID: no. 14762
    • Member State: Italy
    • Common Name:Dante Ruberto v. Istituto Professionale D'Annunzio S.r.l.
    • Decision type: Other
    • Decision date: 03/10/2003
    • Court: Corte di cassazione (Supreme court)
    • Subject:
    • Plaintiff:
    • Defendant:
    • Keywords:
  • Directive Articles
    Doorstep Selling Directive, Article 4
  • Headnote
    1. The Directive 85/577/EEC of 20th December 1985, the Law 15 January 1992, n. 50 (to protect the consumer in respect of contracts negotiated away from business premises) requires contract terms to be drafted in plain and intelligible language and states two requirements for the provision containing the right of cancellation.
    The clause concerning the right of cancellation should be drafted in a clear, immediate and transparent way.
    In order to be more evident for the consumer, the clause should also be drafted indipendently from the other provisions.
    The clause providing such right should also be written with the same characters, or similar characters, that have been used in the whole agreement.
  • Facts
    Mr. Dante Ruberto, on behalf of his son, sued l'Istituto professionale Gabriele D'Annunzio s.r.l. before the Giudice di Pace di Tricase.
    The plaintiff asked the judge to declare that he has legally exercised the right of cancellation from the contract he has stipulated with the Istituto Professionale Gabriele D'Annunzio s.r.l.
    The latter claimed that the deadline to exercise such right has expired and thus the Mr. Mr. Dante Ruberto is still part of the contract.
    Both the Giudice di Pace di Tricase and the Tribunale di Lecce, in Appeal, have rejected the arguments of the plaintiff, Mr. Dante Ruberto, who has decided to bring an action before the Corte di Cassazione.
  • Legal issue
    The Law 15 January 1992, n. 50 has implemented in the Italian legal system the Council Directive 85/577/EEC of 20 December 1985 (to protect the consumer in respect of contracts negotiated away from business premises).
    In this decision, the Corte di Cassazione has stated that the contract terms should be drafted in plain and intelligible language and has indicated two requirements about the clause providing the right of cancellation.
    First, the clause that concerns the right of cancellation should be autonomous from the other contractual clauses in order to be more evident for the consumer. At the same time, it has to be written in a clear, immediate and transparent way.
    Secondly, such clause should be written with the same characters, or similar characters, that have been used for the whole agreement.
    The Corte di Cassazione has concluded that, in our case, the first requirement has not been fulfilled by the parties.
    Thus, the judges of the Italian Supreme Court have asked the Tribunale di Lecce to consider again the controversy on the basis of ruling of this decision.
  • Decision

    Full text: Full text

  • Related Cases

    No results available

  • Legal Literature

    No results available

  • Result