Europejski portal e-sprawiedliwość - Case Law
Zamknij

PORTAL JEST JUŻ DOSTĘPNY W WERSJI BETA!

Odwiedź europejski portal „e-Sprawiedliwość” w wersji beta i powiedz nam, co o nim myślisz!

 
 

Ścieżka nawigacji


menu starting dummy link

Page navigation

menu starting dummy link

Case Details

Case Details
National ID Decision nr DDK 1/2009
Państwo członkowskie Polska
Common Name link
Decision type Administrative decision, first degree
Decision date 28/04/2009
Sąd Urząd Ochrony Konkurencji I Konsumentów w Warszawie
Temat
Powód/powódka The President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection
Pozwany/Pozwana Media Markt Polska sp. z o.o. (Warsaw)
Słowa kluczowe after-sales service, average consumer, complaints, misleading actions, professional diligence

Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, Chapter 2, Article 5, 2. Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, Chapter 2, Section 1, Article 6, 1.

It is contrary to the requirements of professional diligence and the code of conduct regarding complaint handling to obstruct a consumer in executing his rights, by requiring a consumer who returns a product within six months due to non-conformity, to prove the non-conformity at the moment the product was received.
The defendant sells a wide variety of products to consumers, such as television and image systems, sound systems, cameras, DVD films, music, CD, computer games, computers and cell phones.

The object of the proceedings initiated by the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection was the trader’s complaint handling procedure. The trader obstructed the consumers in executing their rights resulting from the non-conformity of the goods with the agreement, by rejecting complaints lodged by consumers within six months of the reception of the good, when the consumer could not prove the non-conformity of the goods at the moment they were received.
Is it an unfair commercial practice to obstruct a consumer in executing his rights, by requiring a consumer who returns a product within six months due to non-conformity with the agreement, to prove the non-conformity at the moment the product was received?
The President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection considered the defendant's practice to be contrary to the requirements of professional diligence and code of conduct regarding complaint handling. The President also considered that such commercial practice obstructs the execution of the consumer's rights.
Full Text: Full Text

No results available

No results available

The practice of the trader was found to be unfair. A financial penalty of PLN 748.982,44 (about 188.000 EUR) was imposed.