• Detalii privind cazul
    • ID național: 14556/2004
    • Statul membru: România
    • Denumire comună:N/A
    • Tipul de decizie: Altele
    • Data deciziei: 02/10/2006
    • Instanţa: Tribunalul Bucuresti, sectia a VI-a comerciala
    • Obiect:
    • Reclamantul:
    • Pârâtul:
    • Cuvinte-cheie: Jurisprudenţă România română
  • Articole din directivă
    Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 2 Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 3, 1. Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 3, 2. Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 5 Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 6, 1. Unfair Contract Terms Directive, ANNEX I, 1.
  • Notă preliminară
    The intermediation contract for purchase of an immovable asset, is in this case an adhesion contract, because the beneficiary does not have the possibility to negotiate the contractual clauses, signing of such contract implying and conditioning the seeing of the immovable. The fact that the defendant accepted to sign such a contract does not mean that he accepted the contractual clauses, agreeing their content, and does not exclude the character of the contract in the sense that it is an adhesion contract.
    The court applied article 1 of the Law no. 193/2000 and considered certain clauses of the mentioned contract as being abusive [respectively para. 2 of article 1]. The court ascertained that the definition of the abusive clause is made in article 4 of the contract [without making a reference to the technical terms or the unambiguous terms provided by article 1 para 1] and ruled that by the clause whereby the beneficiary is obliged to pay the supplier three times the commission in case the payment obligation is not fulfilled a gap between the rights and obligations of the parties is created.
  • Fapte
  • Chestiune juridică
  • Hotărârea

    Text integral: Text integral

  • Cazuri conexe

    Nu există rezultate disponibile

  • Doctrină

    Nu există rezultate disponibile

  • Rezultat