The plaintiff received a visit by a Sole Mio s.r.l. employee proposing to him the purchase of a photovoltaic system. On that occasion, the husband of the plaintiff signed a module for the acceptance of a prospectus in relation to the photovoltaic system feeding (connection). The following week, the Sole Mio s.r.l. employee paid another visit to the plaintiff. In that circumstance the plaintiff signed the contract for the photovoltaic system purchase, signing also a loan contract of € 10.000,00 with Fiditalia s.p.a.
Several written communications followed, in which the plaintiff showed her intention to withdraw from the contract with no response.
The plaintiff brought an action before the court against the defendant in order to ascertain the invalidity of a contract for the purchase of a photovoltaic system signed on the 4th June 2014 with Sole Mio s.r.l. and the consequent termination of the loan contract concluded with Fiditalia s.p.a. for the purchase of such system.
Sole Mio s.r.l. claimed that the obligations arising from the contracts had been performed; Fiditalia s.p.a. claimed its extraneousness to the contractual relationship between Ma. and Sole Mio, having funded the amount of € 10.000,00 in favour of Sole Mio.