The right to withdraw from a timeshare contract is a statutory right, granted by Article 6.1 of the Act of 13 July 2000 on the protection of the purchaser of the right to use a building or a flat in a specified period each year. Article 7.2 of the same act allows the trader to demand that the buyer who withdraws from the contract reimburses the costs of making the contract. While the Supreme Court agreed that the amount of £630 was arbitrary and did not reflect the true costs of making the contract, it did not conclude that Article 385.3 para. 17 was breached. The amount was not, according to the Court, a contractual penalty: such penalties follow a breach of the contract and not withdrawal from it. Irrespective of the fact that Article 385.3 para. 17 could not be applied here, the Court concluded that the request to pay £630 was an unfair clause. Paragraph 17 of Article 385.3 was one of the elements of the list of clauses which may be unfair, but this list was by no means exhaustive. The Court applied the general fairness test, according to which any contractual clause is unfair if it contravenes good faith. It concluded that a clause which limited the consumer’s statutory cancellation rights by imposing a requirement to pay a very high amount of money was unfair.
Pełny tekst: Pełny tekst
Brak wyników
Judgement text will be available soon