Jurisprudence

  • Informations concernant l’affaire
    • ID national: C.15.0234.N
    • État membre: Belgique
    • Nom commun:N/A
    • Type de décision: Décision de la Cour suprême
    • Date de la décision: 17/03/2016
    • Juridiction: Hof van Cassatie
    • Objet:
    • Demandeur: L.M.
    • Défendeur: P.B.
    • Mots clés: conformity with the contract, general discussion, presumption of conformity
  • Articles de la directive
    Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 5, 3.
  • Note introductive
    (1) The nature of animals as a good does not impede the application of the presumption of non-conformity as defined under article 5(3) Directive 1999/44 (implemented into Belgian law by article 1649quater, §4 Civil Code).
  • Faits
    Facts not available.
  • Question juridique
    (1) Does the presumption of non-conformity as defined under article 5(3) Directive 1999/44 (implemented into Belgian law by article 1649quater, §4 Civil Code) apply to the sale of animals?
  • Décision

    The court ruled that the canton court was wrong when it stated that animals, because of their nature, are inherently incompatible with the presumption of non-conformity as defined under article 5(3) Directive 1999/44.

    Texte intégral: Texte intégral

  • Affaires liées

    Aucun résultat disponible

  • Doctrine

    Aucun résultat disponible

  • Résultat
    The court set aside the judgment of the canton court and referred to the canton court of Ghent.