Even if a buyer has already exercised the right to ask for the repair of a defective good, he may still exercise the right to request for the reduction of the price or to withdraw from the contract, in case that although the repair took place, however, the defect has still remained. Τhe claim to repair a product provides an additional option to the buyer to receive the proper fulfillment of the purchase contract (by repairing the defect) prior to exercising any other, more radical, right. But when this repair is impossible or ineffective, then the exclusion of the buyer from the ability to exercise other rights would have resulted in failing to satisfying him from the purchase contract; this failure would have been against the principles and the purposes of the law. Thus, in the latter case, the buyer may exercise the right of withdrawal, that reverses the contract of sale and the parties bear the mutual obligation to return the received benefits. So, in principle, the right of the buyer to repair the defect of the good, to which the seller did not respond (or has failed to satisfy), does not exclude the exercise of the other rights by the buyer and in particular that of withdrawal. In this context, the court ruled that, since the lack of the agreed property of the system remained (even after the repair efforts), the system became inappropriate for the purpose it was purchased by the plaintiff and thus the latter could withdraw from the contract and request the refund of the amount paid from the defendant.
Πλήρες κείμενο: Πλήρες κείμενο