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 II. ÚS 2164/10
Member State Czech Republic
Common Name link
Decision type Other
Decision date 01/11/2011
Court Ústavní soud (Constitutional court)
Subject
Plaintiff
Defendant
Keywords

Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 3, 3.

The arbitration clause in consumer contracts must contain transparent and clear rules for appointing a person as arbitrator. In case of arrangement under consumer contract the arbitration must generally guarantee procedural rights comparable to those that would be applied in proceedings without arbitration clause (oral deposition, straightness requirements, board of instances, absence of other barriers to exercise consumer's rights).
Consumer referring to arbitration clause, filed along with another claimant for hearing before arbitrator Mgr. K., but the latter explicitly refused to resolve the dispute and, therefore, turned to the court which also turned down to settle the dispute for its alleged lack of competence. Complainant expresses its conviction that the contract does not imply that if one of two arbitrators refuses to deal with the case, proposal must be submitted to another arbitrator, what general courts deduced. He emphasized that the arbitration clause expressly states that the parties opted for the arbitrator Mgr. K., who however refused to settle the dispute. It is not possible to invoke a vague arbitration clause and to appoint arbitrator on an ad hoc basis. The complainant states that the appointment of the second arbitrator is invalid and courts should take account of this invalidity.
Constitutional Court concludes that the arbitration clause, as it was negotiated in this case, is inadmissible, because the situation in which arbitrator, who is not appointed in a transparent way (discussed in the section below), decided only by the principles of justice and consumer was deprived of his right of a civil court action means violation of his right to a fair trial.
Full Text: Full Text

No results available

No results available