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 link
Member State Belgium
Common Name link
Decision type Other
Decision date 22/01/2016
Court Supreme Court
Subject
Plaintiff S.A.
Defendant Immobilière L.A., O.L. and P.D.
Keywords contract law, information obligation, right of cancellation, right of withdrawal

Distance Selling Directive, link Doorstep Selling Directive, link

Where a contract which was entered into outside of the trader's business premises is penalized by a criminal fine if the consumer's right of withdrawal has not been included therein under the legal phrasing, then this does not imply that the contract is absolutely null.
The case concerned the interpretation of a contract concluded between a consumer (plaintiff) and a real estate agent (defendant). Plaintiff claimed that the contract concluded with the defendant was absolutely null on account of it not including the necessary information on the right of withdrawal.
The court stated that the fact that a specific statutory requirement is penalized by a criminal sanction does not automatically mean that this statutory provision is of public policy (ordre public) and that ex officio nullity may be invoked.
Where a contract which was entered into outside of the trader's business premises is penalized by a criminal fine if the consumer's right of withdrawal has not been included therein under the legal phrasing, does this then imply that the contract is absolutely null?
Full Text: Full Text

No results available

No results available

The court referred the case back to the Court of Appeal of Mons