Doctrine

Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 3, 3.

The author welcomes the ECJ’s view in the case C-247/16 that the Consumer Sales Directive applies not only to contracts of sale sensu stricto, but also to certain categories of contract involving a supply of services, which, in accordance with applicable national law, are capable of falling within the classification of contracts for services or work. But, in order for those categories of contract involving a supply of services to be classified as ‘contracts of sale’ within the meaning of that Directive, the supply of services must be ancillary to the sale.

The author draws an interesting parallel with the Vienna Convention on contracts for the international sale of goods (CISG) and concludes that the ECJ comes to a similar solution.

As regards the reasonable period that must be granted to the seller for the reparation or replacement of the goods, the author first accurately compares the differences that exist between the Belgian and the German consumer sales legislation. Furthermore, the author points out that, apart from the discussion about what a reasonable period might be (given the flexible approach of the Belgian Courts in application of that requirement), there is disagreement in case law and doctrine about the precise consequences for the consumer who does not allow a reasonable period for the seller to repair or replace the goods.