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 ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2014:4589
Member State Netherlands
Common Name link
Decision type Court decision in appeal
Decision date 04/11/2014
Court Court of appeal Amsterdam
Subject
Plaintiff Unknown
Defendant Unknown
Keywords consumer, delivery, false impression, false information, informed decision

Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, link Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 3 Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 4

(1) A party acts in the course of his/hers business if and when a buyer has reasonable cause to believe that he/she did so.
(2) A good is presumed nonconforming if and when the apparent defect or fault manifests itself within six months after purchase.
Consumers buy a pony from an owner of a horse sanatorium but it later turned out to be lame. The pony belonged to the daughter (age 14) of the seller, but was sold by her father. The plaintiff is of the opinion that he bought the pony from the owner who is acting in the course of his business, whereas the owner claims he acted as a natural person and not in the course of his business. Furthermore, the plaintiff is of the opinion that the pony is nonconforming.
The question between which parties the agreement is effected needs to be answered on the basis of what the parties in these circumstances reasonably could attach to each other’s statements and actions and what they could reasonably expect from each other. The court concludes that the seller, even though he did not only or mainly sell horses, sold the pony in the course of a profession or a business and the consumers, who are natural persons, did not buy in the course of a profession or a business. Therefore the provisions of consumers sale are applicable to the purchase agreement. The court also rules that since the lameness of the pony has manifested itself within 6 months after the sale the pony can thus be presumed to be nonconforming. As a result, the plaintiff had the right to terminate the purchase agreement.
(1) Under what circumstances does a party act in the course of his business?
(2) When can a good be presumed to be nonconforming?
Full Text: Full Text

No results available

No results available

The court reversed the first instance court’s judgment.