European e-Justice Portal - Case Law
Close

BETA VERSION OF THE PORTAL IS NOW AVAILABLE!

Visit the BETA version of the European e-Justice Portal and give us feedback of your experience!

 
 

Navigation path


menu starting dummy link

Page navigation

menu starting dummy link

Case Details

Case Details
National ID 10739
Member State Italy
Common Name M.V. e altro c. Banca Piacenza
Decision type Other
Decision date 27/09/2006
Court Tribunale (Court of first instance, Milano)
Subject
Plaintiff
Defendant
Keywords

Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 2 Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 3, 1. Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 4, 1. Unfair Contract Terms Directive, ANNEX I, 1.

A clause establishing a jurisdiction different from those of the judge where the consumer is resident or domiciled should be considered unfair. This applies also to the consumer contracts concerning investments services.
Not available.
The Tribunal of Milan confirmed the interpretation of the art. 33, paragraph 2, letter u, of the Consumer Code on the jurisdiction in consumers’ contracts rendered by the Sezioni Unite of the Corte di cassazione in the judgment no. 14669/2003.
At to the Tribunal of Milan, a clause establishing a jurisdiction different from those of the judge where the consumer is resident or domiciled should be considered unfair.
It is interesting to note that this interpretation also applies to the consumer contract concerning investment services.
Full Text: Full Text

No results available

No results available