Category: Consumer

Oceano Grupo Editorial and Salvat Editores (Judgment): ECJ 27 Jun 2000

Europa Where a jurisdiction clause is included, without being individually negotiated, in a contract between a consumer and a seller or supplier and where it confers exclusive jurisdiction on a court in the territorial jurisdiction of which the seller or supplier has his principal place of business, it must be regarded as unfair within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 93/13 on unfair terms in consumer contracts in so far as it causes, contrary to the requirement of good faith, a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.
The protection provided for consumers by Directive 93/13 on unfair terms in consumer contracts entails the national court being able to determine of its own motion whether a term of a contract before it is unfair when making its preliminary assessment as to whether a claim should be allowed to proceed before the national courts. The national court is obliged, when it applies national law provisions predating or postdating the said Directive, to interpret those provisions, so far as possible, in the light of the wording and purpose of the Directive. The requirement for an interpretation in conformity with the Directive requires the national court, in particular, to favour the interpretation that would allow it to decline of its own motion the jurisdiction conferred on it by virtue of an unfair term.
Europa Approximation of laws – Unfair terms in consumer contracts – Directive 93/13 – Power of the national court to determine of its own motion whether a term of a contract is unfair when making its assessment of the contract – Obligation to ensure the effectiveness of the directive when national law is applied. Where a jurisdiction clause is included, without being individually negotiated, in a contract between a consumer and a seller or supplier and where it confers exclusive jurisdiction on a court in the territorial jurisdiction of which the seller or supplier has his principal place of business, it must be regarded as unfair within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 93/13 on unfair terms in consumer contracts in so far as it causes, contrary to the requirement of good faith, a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.
The protection provided for consumers by Directive 93/13 on unfair terms in consumer contracts entails the national court being able to determine of its own motion whether a term of a contract before it is unfair when making its preliminary assessment as to whether a claim should be allowed to proceed before the national courts. The national court is obliged, when it applies national law provisions predating or postdating the said Directive, to interpret those provisions, so far as possible, in the light of the wording and purpose of the Directive. The requirement for an interpretation in conformity with the Directive requires the national court, in particular, to favour the interpretation that would allow it to decline of its own motion the jurisdiction conferred on it by virtue of an unfair term.
C-240/98, [2000] EUECJ C-240/98
Bailii
European
Cited by:
Cited – Khatun, Zeb, Iqbal v London Borough of Newham Admn 10-Oct-2003
Each applicant had been accepted as homeless by the respondent, but was then offered alternative accomodation under terms which they found unacceptable. They argued that the Regulations applied. The council had disapplied one statutory guidance in . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 August 2021; Ref: scu.162435

Gebr Weber GmbH v Jurgen Wittmer (Environment And Consumers): ECJ 18 May 2010

Europa Consumer protection – Sale of consumer goods – Article 3(2) and (3) of Directive 1999/44/EC – Consumer goods not in conformity with the contract installed by the consumer – Right to replacement of goods not in conformity – Scope – No liability of the seller for the costs incurred by the dismantling of the defective goods – Unreasonably high costs for the seller.
C-65/09, [2010] EUECJ C-65/09 – O, [2011] EUECJ C-65/09
Bailii, Bailii
Directive 1999/44/EC
European

Updated: 12 August 2021; Ref: scu.416425

Commission v Netherlands C-144/99: ECJ 10 May 2001

ECJ Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Directive 93/13/EEC – Unfair terms in consumer contracts – Incomplete transposition of the directive into national law. As to the applicable principles in transposing Directives as fully effective in national law: ‘The Court has explained that . . the Member States must define a specific legal framework in the sector concerned which ensures that the national legal system complies with the provisions of the directive in question. The framework must be designed in such a way as to remove all doubt or ambiguity, not only as regards the content of the relevant national legislation and its compliance with the directive, but also as regards the authority of that legislation and its suitability as a basis for regulation of the sector . . Consequently, given that the Member State concerned is required to ensure the full and exact application of the provisions of any directive, it falls short of its obligations so long as it has not completely complied with [the directive], even if that [domestic] law has to a large extent already secured the objectives of the directive. Any rights conferred by [the] directive must be guaranteed full protection . . Regard must be had to the Court’s consistent concern to ensure that the existing national legislation leaves no doubt as to the effects of the directive upon the legal position of individuals. In the words of the Court, ‘it is particularly important, in order to satisfy the requirement for legal certainty, that individuals should have the benefit of a clear and precise legal situation enabling them to ascertain the full extent of their rights and, where appropriate, to rely on them before the national courts.”
C-144/99, [2001] EUECJ C-144/99, [2001] ECR I-3541
Bailii
Directive 93/13/EEC
European
Cited by:
Cited – Alabaster v Barclays Bank Plc and Another CA 3-May-2005
The claimant sought increased maternity pay. Before beginning her maternity leave she had been awarded a pay increase, but it was not backdated so as to affect the period upon which the calculation of her average pay was based. The court made a . .
Cited – Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and seven Others ComC 24-Apr-2008
The Office sought a declaration that the respondent and other banks were subject to the provisions of the Regulations in their imposition of bank charges to customer accounts, and in particular as to the imposition of penalties or charges for the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 August 2021; Ref: scu.162749

Van Der Lans v Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV: ECJ 17 Sep 2015

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Air transport – Passengers’ rights in the event of delay or cancellation of a flight – Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 – Article 5(3) – Denied boarding and cancellation – Long flight delay – Compensation and assistance to passengers – Extraordinary circumstances
C-257/14, [2015] EUECJ C-257/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:618
Bailii
Regulation (EC) No 261/2004
European

Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.552684

Club-Tour, Viagens e Turismo SA v Alberto Carlos Lobo Goncalves Garrido, and Club Med Viagens Ld: ECJ 30 Apr 2002

The term package used in Article 2(1) of Directive 90/314 on package travel, package holidays and package tours, must be interpreted so as to include holidays organised by travel agents, at the request of and in accordance with the specifications of a consumer or limited group of consumers. According to the definition of package given in Article 2(1) of the directive, which is designed amongst other things to protect consumers who buy package holidays, it is enough if, first, the combination of tourist services sold by a travel agency at an inclusive price includes two of the three services referred to in that paragraph and, second, that service covers a period of more than 24 hours or includes overnight accommodation. There is nothing in that definition to suggest that holidays organised at the request of and in accordance with the specifications of a consumer or a defined group of consumers cannot be regarded as package holidays within the meaning of the Directive. That interpretation is reinforced by the directive, which provides that among the elements to be included in a contract covered by the directive are special requirements which the consumer has communicated to the organiser or retailer when making the booking, and which both have accepted. As the definition of package referred to in Article 2(1) of Directive 90/314 on package travel, package holidays and package tours includes holidays organised in accordance with the consumer’s specifications, the term pre-arranged combination used in that provision necessarily covers cases where the combination of tourist services is the result of the wishes expressed by the consumer up to the moment when the parties reach an agreement and conclude the contract. The term pre-arranged combination used in Article 2(1) of Directive 90/314 must be interpreted so as include combinations of tourist services put together at the time when the contract is concluded between the travel agency and the consumer.
[2002] EUECJ C-400/00
Bailii
Directive 90/314 on package travel
European

Updated: 31 July 2021; Ref: scu.171178

Peter Pammer v Reederei Karl Schluter GmbH and Co KG etc: ECJ 18 May 2010

ECJ (Opinion) Regulation No 44/2001 – Article 15, paragraph 1 (c) and 3 – Jurisdiction over consumer contracts – Management of a business to a Member State where the consumer’s home – Accessibility of website – Contract for a fixed price that combines travel and accommodation – Travel freighter.
Mme V Trstenjak
C-144/09, [2010] EUECJ C-144/09
Bailii
Regulation No 44/2001
European
Cited by:
Opinion – Peter Pammer v Reederei Karl Schluter GmbH and Co KG etc ECJ 7-Dec-2010
ECJ (Grand Chamber) Jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters – Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Article 15(1)(c) and (3) – Jurisdiction over consumer contracts – Contract for a voyage by freighter – Concept of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.416428

R and B Customs Brokers Co Ltd v United Dominions Trust Ltd: CA 1988

There was an issue whether or not the purchase by the plaintiff of a second-hand car was made ‘in the course of a business’ so as to preclude the plaintiff from relying upon the provisions of the 1977 Act.
Held: Speaking of Lord Keith’s description of the Act in Davies v Sumner: ‘Lord Keith emphasised the need for some degree of regularity, and he found pointers to this in the primary purpose and long title of the Trade Descriptions Act 1968. I find pointers to a similar need for regularity under the Act of 1977, where matters merely incidental to the carrying on of a business are concerned, both in the words which I would emphasise, ‘in the course of’ in the phrase ‘in the course of a business’ and in the concept, or legislative purpose, which must underlie the dichotomy under the Act of 1977 between those who deal as consumers and those who deal otherwise than as consumers.
This reasoning leads to the conclusion that, in the Act of 1977 also, the words ‘in the course of business’, are not used in what Lord Keith called ‘the broadest sense’. I also find helpful the phrase used by Lord Parker C.J. and quoted by Lord Keith, ‘an integral part of the business carried on.’ The reconciliation between that phrase and the need for some degree of regularity is, as I see it, as follows: there are some transactions which are clearly integral parts of the businesses concerned, and these should be held to have been carried out in the course of those businesses; this would cover, apart from much else, the instance of a one-off adventure in the nature of trade, where the transaction itself would constitute a trade or business. There are other transactions, however, such as the purchase of a car in the present case, which are at highest only incidental to the carrying on of the relevant business; here a degree of regularity is required before it can be said that they are an integral part of the business carried on, and so entered into in the course of that business.’
Neill L.J noted that expression similar to ‘in the course of a business’, were used in statutes such as the Sale of Goods Act 1979, the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 and the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. He noted that section 1(1) of the Trade Descriptions Act creates a criminal offence, but nonetheless thought that it would be unsatisfactory if, when dealing with broadly similar legislation, the courts were not to adopt a consistent construction of the same or similar phrases. For that reason he thought that the court should follow the guidance given in Davies v Sumner when construing section 12(1) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act.
Dillon LJ, Neill LJ
[1988] 1 WLR 321, [1987] EWCA Civ 3, [1988] 1 All ER 847
Bailii
Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 12(1), Sale of Goods Act 1979
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Davies v Sumner HL 1984
The defendant used his own car almost exclusively in the course of his occupation as a courier. He sold and replaced it with another for similar use. He was charged before justices with the offence of applying, ‘in the course of trade or business’, . .
Cited – Lord Advocate v Lord Lovat 1880
Lord O’Hagan considered the nature of possession as regards land: ‘As to possession, it must be considered in every case with reference to the peculiar circumstances. The acts, implying possession in one case, may be wholly inadequate to prove it in . .
Cited – Henry Kendall and Sons v William Lillico and Sons Ltd HL 8-May-1968
The plaintiff had purchased quantities of turkey feed from the defendant. It contained a poisonous element, spores of a fungus aspergillus flavus, which killed its flock. The House was asked as to the effect of section 14 of the 1893 Act on the . .
Cited – DHN Food Distributors Ltd v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council CA 1976
The business was owned by DHN and the land upon which the business was operated was owned by a wholly owned subsidiary, Bronze. The Council acquired land owned by Bronze on which DHN operated its cash and carry warehouse. The Council submitted that . .

Cited by:
Cited – Stevenson and Another v Rogers CA 8-Dec-1998
The defendant, who carried on the business of a fisherman, sold his vessel Jelle to the plaintiff with a view to having a new boat built to his requirements. In the event he bought a replacement vessel which he continued to use for his business. The . .
Cited – GE Capital Bank Ltd v Rushton and Another CA 14-Dec-2005
The bank had entered into a master trading agreement with a trader under which the trader bought motor vehicles as agent for the bank for resale. The vehicles belonged to the bank. The defendant bought all the trader’s vehicles. The defendant now . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 July 2021; Ref: scu.187299

X Bank (Order): ECJ 10 Jun 2021

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court – Consumer protection – Directive 93/13 / EEC – Article 2 (b) – Concept of ‘consumer’ – Mortgage loan denominated in foreign currency – Articles 3 and 4 – Assessment of the unfair nature of a clause ‘
C-198/20, [2021] EUECJ C-198/20_CO
Bailii
European

Updated: 22 July 2021; Ref: scu.664361

Commission v Suede: ECJ 7 May 2002

Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Directive 93/13/EEC – Unfair terms in consumer contracts – Obligation to reproduce in national legislation the list of terms which may be regarded as unfair contained in the annex to Directive 93/13
[2002] EUECJ C-478/99
Bailii
European

Updated: 21 July 2021; Ref: scu.171299

Milner and Another v Carnival Plc (T/A Cunard): CA 20 Apr 2010

Damages for Disastrous Cruise

The claimants had gone on a cruise organised by the defendants. It was described by them as ‘the trip of a lifetime.’ It did not meet their expectations. There had been several complaints, including that the cabin was noisy as the floor flexed with the ship. The company now appealed against an award of pounds 22,500 in damages.
Held: The court set out principles for the award of damages in this area, taking into account comparable cases and guidelines from the Judicial Studies Board, and cases on affront from discrimination law. The court should make the assessment under two heads, first the diminution in value and then the distress and disappointment, but avoiding any duplication of damages. When looking at the diminution, the actual sum paid mattered not the advertised cost. It was part of the task to measure the expectations against the reality. It had been wrong to award the cost of the extra dresses purchased for the trip. They were not worn because the claimants left the tour.
The general damages for inconvenience were reduced to pounds 4,000 and pounds 4,500 and pounds 3,500 for the diminution, totalling pounds 12,000.
Ward LJ, Richards LJ, Goldring LJ
[2010] EWCA Civ 389, [2010] 3 All ER 701, [2010] PIQR Q3, [2010] 2 All ER (Comm) 397
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Hobbs v London and South Western Railway Company 1875
Damages for personal inconvenience ‘where it is sufficiently serious’ is recoverable at law (per Sir Alexander Cockburn CJ). Mellor J said however that: ‘for the mere inconvenience, such as annoyance and loss of temper, or vexation, or for being . .
Cited – Stedman v Swan’s Tours CA 1951
The plaintiffs sought damages for their disappointing holiday in Jersey. Instead of enjoying the superior rooms with a sea view in a first class hotel expected, the holiday party found that the rooms reserved for them were very inferior and had no . .
Cited – Farley v Skinner HL 11-Oct-2001
The claimant sought damages from the defendant surveyor. He had asked the defendant whether the house he was to buy was subject to aircraft noise. After re-assurance, he bought the house. The surveyor was wrong and negligent. A survey would not . .
Cited – South Australia Asset Management Corporation v York Montague Ltd etc HL 24-Jun-1996
Limits of Damages for Negligent Valuations
Damages for negligent valuations are limited to the foreseeable consequences of advice, and do not include losses arising from a general fall in values. Valuation is seldom an exact science, and within a band of figures valuers may differ without . .
Cited – Parry v Cleaver HL 5-Feb-1969
PI Damages not Reduced for Own Pension
The plaintiff policeman was disabled by the negligence of the defendant and received a disablement pension. Part had been contributed by himself and part by his employer.
Held: The plaintiff’s appeal succeeded. Damages for personal injury were . .
Cited – Kepple-Palmer v Exus Travel QBD 2003
Gage J considered a holiday disappointment claim saying: ‘In my opinion the claimant is entitled to a sum representing diminution in value of the holiday. In assessing this sum I take into account that this was on any view a very expensive holiday. . .
Cited – Wright v British Railways Board HL 1983
An award of interest at a conventional rate includes an element in respect of the ‘real’ rate of return which an investor could expect to receive on a risk-free investment and an element to allow for inflation. Lord Diplock said: ‘that element of . .
Cited – Jarvis v Swans Tours Ltd CA 16-Oct-1972
The plaintiff had booked a holiday through the defendant travel tour company. He claimed damages after the holiday failed to live up to expectations.
Held: In appropriate cases where one party contracts to provide entertainment and enjoyment, . .
Cited – Adcock v Blue Sky Holidays Ltd CA 13-May-1980
The plaintiffs sought damages after their holiday was disappointing. The cost of the holiday for five people was andpound;98 per person. The county court judge had allowed damages separately for the five holiday makers, having regard to how the . .
Cited – Jackson v Horizon Holidays Ltd CA 5-Feb-1974
A family claimed damages for a disappointing holiday. The generous measure of damages given to the father was that the father was being fully compensated for his own mental distress, but the rule of privity of contract operated to bar the claim for . .
Cited – Vento v The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2) CA 20-Dec-2002
The claimant had been awarded damages for sex discrimination, including a sum of andpound;25,000 for injury to feelings. The respondent appealed.
Held: The Court of Appeal looked to see whether there had been an error of law in the employment . .
Cited – Watts and Co v Morrow CA 30-Jul-1991
The plaintiff had bought a house on the faith of the defendant’s report that there were only limited defects requiring repair. In fact the defects were much more extensive. The defendant surveyor appealed against an award of damages after his . .

Cited by:
Cited – Morris-Garner and Another v One Step (Support) Ltd SC 18-Apr-2018
The Court was asked in what circumstances can damages for breach of contract be assessed by reference to the sum that the claimant could hypothetically have received in return for releasing the defendant from the obligation which he failed to . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 July 2021; Ref: scu.408543

Brookes v Retail Credit Cards Ltd: QBD 1986

The defendants, a regulated consumer credit provider provided its srevices to A’s customers. A’s promotional materials were found to be in breach of the Act and the defendant was now prosecuted for procuring that offence.
Held: The prosecutor’s appeal against dismissal failed. Obiter, section 170(1) might, but did not necessarily, preclude an action. Lloyd LJ said: ‘The exclusion of civil sanctions other than those provided in the Act serves an obvious purpose. Exclusion of criminal sanctions is not so easy to understand. Whatever the reason for the exclusion and whatever it was intended to cover, I am clear that it does not exclude the liability of accessories’.
Lloyd LJ
(1986) CCLR 5, (1987) CLR 327
Consumer Credit Act 1974 170(1)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Kettering Magistrates’ Court ex parte MRB Insurance Brokers Limited Admn 4-Apr-2000
A statement of an APR in the sale of a financial services product remained a price indication, and, if it was miscalculated, that was a misleading price indication, and criminal, despite provisions in the Consumer Credit legislation. What was given . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 July 2021; Ref: scu.430075

Commission v Greece: ECJ 25 Apr 2002

Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Directive 85/374/EEC – Product liability – Incorrect transposition
ECLI:EU:C:2002:254, [2002] EUECJ C-154/00, [2002] ECR I-3879
Bailii
European

Updated: 13 July 2021; Ref: scu.170260

Mohamed Aziz v Caixa D’Estalvis De Catalunya, Tarragona I Manresa: ECJ 14 Mar 2013

ECJ Directive 93/13/EEC – Consumer contracts – Mortgage loan agreement – Mortgage enforcement proceedings – Powers of the court hearing the declaratory proceedings – Unfair terms – Assessment criteria
A. Tizzano P
C-415/11, [2013] EUECJ C-415/11, ECLI:EU:C:2013:164, [2013] 3 CMLR 89
Bailii
Directive 93/13/EEC
European

Updated: 09 July 2021; Ref: scu.471907

Bucura v SC Bancpost SA: ECJ 9 Jul 2015

ECJ Judgment – Preliminary reference – Consumer protection – Directive 87/102 / EEC – Article 1, paragraph 2 a) – Consumer credit – Definition of ‘consumer’ – Directive 93/13 / EEC – Articles 2 b) 3 to 5 and 6, paragraph 1 – Unfair terms – Examination by the national court – Clauses ‘in plain intelligible language’ – Information to be provided by the creditor ‘
C-348/14, [2015] EUECJ C-348/14, ECLI: EU: C: 2015: 447
Bailii
Directive 87/102 / EEC
European

Updated: 22 June 2021; Ref: scu.549986

Khalifeh v Blom Bank SAL: QBD 4 Jun 2021

Application for an anti-suit injunction requiring the Defendant to discontinue proceedings issued in Lebanon and to be restrained from commencing or prosecuting any further such proceedings until further order.
Freedman J
[2021] EWHC 1502 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 20 June 2021; Ref: scu.663356

Varano v Air Canada: QBD 17 May 2021

The Claimant sought compensation from the defendant airline in the fixed sum of 600 Euros in respect of a delayed flight in April 2016. The claim was brought pursuant to Article 7 of Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding, or cancellation, or long delay of flights.
Geraint Webb QC
[2021] EWHC 1336 (QB)
Bailii
Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of 11 February 2004 7
England and Wales

Updated: 17 June 2021; Ref: scu.663348

Bairstow Eves London Central Ltd v Smith and Another: QBD 20 Feb 2004

Gross J
[2004] EWHC 263 (QB), [2004] 29 EG 118, [2004] 2 EGLR
Bailii
Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (SI 1999/2083)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and seven Others ComC 24-Apr-2008
The Office sought a declaration that the respondent and other banks were subject to the provisions of the Regulations in their imposition of bank charges to customer accounts, and in particular as to the imposition of penalties or charges for the . .
Cited – Office of Fair Trading (OFT) v Abbey National Plc and Others SC 25-Nov-2009
The banks appealed against a ruling that the OFT could investigate the fairness or otherwise of their systems for charging bank customers for non-agreed items as excessive relative to the services supplied. The banks said that regulation 6(2) could . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 June 2021; Ref: scu.347396

British Airways Board v Taylor: HL 1976

Lord Wilberforce said: ‘My Lords, the distinction in law between a promise as to future action, which may be broken or kept, and a statement as to existing fact, which may be true or false, is clear enough. There may be inherent in a promise an implied statement as to a fact, and where this is really the case, the court can attach appropriate consequences to any falsity in, or recklessness in the making of, that statement. Everyone is familiar with the proposition that a statement of intention may itself be a statement of fact and so capable of being true or false. But this proposition should not be used as a general solvent to transform the one type of assurance with another: the distinction is a real one and requires to be respected, particularly where the effect of treating an assurance as a statement is to attract criminal consequences, as in the present case.’
References: [1976] 1 WLR 13
Judges: Lord Wilberforce
Statutes: Trade Descriptions Act 1968 14(1)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Shropshire County Council (David Walker) v Simon Dudley Limited Admn 17-Dec-1996
    A customer’s description of the goods he required was a trade description for the future supply of those goods by the seller claiming to fulfil that specification. The trading standards officer appealed dismissal of his prosecution of the defendant . .
    (Times 03-Jan-97, , [1996] EWHC Admin 376)

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 27 November 2020; Ref: scu.194020

Verein Fur Konsumenteninformation v A1 Telekom Austria AG: ECJ 26 Nov 2015

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 2002/22/EC – Electronic communications networks and services – Users’ rights – Right of subscribers to terminate their contract without penalty – Changes to charges under terms of the contract – Increase in charges in line with increase in the consumer price index
References: C-326/14, [2015] EUECJ C-326/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:782
Links: Bailii
Statutes: Directive 2002/22/EC

Last Update: 15 October 2020; Ref: scu.556131

Severi, in his own name and representing Cavazzuti e figli SpA, now known as Grandi Salumifici Italiani SpA v Regione Emilia-Romagna: ECJ 10 Sep 2009

ECJ Directive 2000/13/EC – Labelling of foodstuffs to be delivered as such to the ultimate consumer – Labelling likely to mislead the purchaser as to the origin or provenance of the foodstuff – Generic names within the meaning of Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 Effect
References: [2009] EUECJ C-446/07, C-446/07
Links: Bailii
Statutes: Directive 2000/13/EC
This case cites:

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 23 September 2020; Ref: scu.518492

Peter Macinsky v Getfin SRO Financreal SRO: ECJ 21 Nov 2013

ECJ Opinion – Admissibility – Directive 93/13/EEC – Consumer credit agreement – Unfair terms – Settlement of a secured claim by recourse to the public auction of immovable property – Possibility of foregoing judicial proceedings under national legislation – Principle of effectiveness – Limitation of the temporal effects of a judgment
References: C-482/12, [2013] EUECJ C-482/12
Links: Bailii
Judges: Wahl AG
Statutes: Directive 93/13/EEC
Jurisdiction: European

Last Update: 23 September 2020; Ref: scu.518462

Banco De Valencia Sa v Maria Teodolinda Rivas Quichimbo: ECJ 14 Nov 2013

ECJ Directive 93/13/EEC – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Consumer contracts – Mortgage loan agreement – Mortgage enforcement proceedings – Powers of the national court responsible for enforcement – Unfair terms – Criteria for assessment
References: C-537/12, [2013] EUECJ C-537/12
Links: Bailii
Statutes: Directive 93/13/EEC

Last Update: 23 September 2020; Ref: scu.518453

Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and others: ComC 21 Jan 2009

References: [2009] EWHC 36 (Comm)
Links: Bailii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:

  • See also – Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and seven Others ComC 24-Apr-2008 (, [2008] EWHC 875 (Comm), Times 29-Apr-08, Gazette 08-May-05, [2008] 2 All ER (Comm) 625)
    The Office sought a declaration that the respondent and other banks were subject to the provisions of the Regulations in their imposition of bank charges to customer accounts, and in particular as to the imposition of penalties or charges for the . .
  • See also – Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and others ComC 8-Oct-2008 (, [2008] EWHC 2325 (Comm))
    The director sought a further judgment as to whether charges imposed by banks on a customer taking an unauthorised overdraft, and otherwise were unlawful penalties. . .

This case is cited by:

  • See Also – Abbey National Plc and others v The Office of Fair Trading CA 26-Feb-2009 (, [2009] EWCA Civ 116, Times 03-Mar-09, [2009] 2 CMLR 30, [2009] 1 All ER (Comm) 1097, [2009] 2 WLR 1286)
    The OFT had sought to enquire as to the fairness of the terms on which banks conducted their accounts with consumers, and in particular as to how they charged for unauthorised overdrafts. The banks denied that the OFT had jurisdiction, and now . .
  • See also – Office of Fair Trading (OFT) v Abbey National Plc and Others SC 25-Nov-2009 (, [2009] UKSC 6, Times 26-Nov-09, [2009] 3 WLR 1215)
    The banks appealed against a ruling that the OFT could investigate the fairness or otherwise of their systems for charging bank customers for non-agreed items as excessive relative to the services supplied. The banks said that regulation 6(2) could . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 22 September 2020; Ref: scu.293978

Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and others: ComC 8 Oct 2008

The director sought a further judgment as to whether charges imposed by banks on a customer taking an unauthorised overdraft, and otherwise were unlawful penalties.
References: [2008] EWHC 2325 (Comm)
Links: Bailii
Judges: Andrew Smith J
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:

  • See Also – Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and seven Others ComC 24-Apr-2008 (, [2008] EWHC 875 (Comm), Times 29-Apr-08, Gazette 08-May-05, [2008] 2 All ER (Comm) 625)
    The Office sought a declaration that the respondent and other banks were subject to the provisions of the Regulations in their imposition of bank charges to customer accounts, and in particular as to the imposition of penalties or charges for the . .
  • Cited – Wallersteiner v Moir CA 1974 ([1974] 1 WLR 991)
    The making of a declaration is a judicial act. A shareholder is entitled to bring a derivative action on behalf of the company when it is controlled by persons alleged to have injured the company who refuse to allow the company to sue. It is an . .
  • Cited – Cooden Engineering Co Ltd v Stanford CA 1953 ([1953] 1 QB 86, [1952] 2 All ER 915)
    A payment to be made on a wrongful termination of a lease by a tenant, will attract consideration of the law of penalties, for notwithstanding the requirement for acceptance of it, the amount to be paid is, ‘plainly a sum to be paid in consequence . .
  • Cited – Jervis v Harris CA 9-Nov-1995 (Ind Summary 04-Dec-95, Gazette 24-Jan-96, Times 14-Nov-95, , [1995] EWCA Civ 9, [1996] Ch 195, [1996] 2 WLR 220, [1996] 1 All ER 303, [1996] 1 EGLR 78, [1996] 10 EG 159)
    A provision in the lease obliged a tenant to carry out repairs and provided that if he did not do so, the landlord might do the repairs and recover from the tenant the costs and expenses of doing so.
    Held: The provision was not a penalty. The . .

This case is cited by:

  • See Also – Abbey National Plc and others v The Office of Fair Trading CA 26-Feb-2009 (, [2009] EWCA Civ 116, Times 03-Mar-09, [2009] 2 CMLR 30, [2009] 1 All ER (Comm) 1097, [2009] 2 WLR 1286)
    The OFT had sought to enquire as to the fairness of the terms on which banks conducted their accounts with consumers, and in particular as to how they charged for unauthorised overdrafts. The banks denied that the OFT had jurisdiction, and now . .
  • See also – Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and others ComC 21-Jan-2009 (, [2009] EWHC 36 (Comm))
    . .
  • See also – Office of Fair Trading (OFT) v Abbey National Plc and Others SC 25-Nov-2009 (, [2009] UKSC 6, Times 26-Nov-09, [2009] 3 WLR 1215)
    The banks appealed against a ruling that the OFT could investigate the fairness or otherwise of their systems for charging bank customers for non-agreed items as excessive relative to the services supplied. The banks said that regulation 6(2) could . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 22 September 2020; Ref: scu.277032

Trident Turboprop (Dublin) Ltd v First Flight Couriers Ltd; Comc 17 Jul 2008

References: [2008] EWHC 1686 (Comm), [2009] 1 All ER (Comm) 16
Links: Bailii
Coram: Aikens J
Trident entered into Aircraft Operating Lease Agreements in identical terms with First Flight in respect of two ATP model aircraft. The leases represented the culmination of negotiations between a representative of the manufacturer, BAE Systems Regional Aircraft Limited (‘BAE’), and representatives of First Flight and were signed by a representative of BAE on behalf of Trident. Each provided for delivery to take place at Southend airport. Application for summary judgment under aircraft leasing agreements – no payment of rent. The defendant argued that the clause disallowing them from alleging any misrepresentation failed to satisfy the reasonableness requirement under the 1977 Act.
Held: The leases fell within section 26 and the agreements were exempt. Judgement was given for the claimant.
Statutes: Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 26
This case is cited by:

  • Appeal From – Trident Turboprop (Dublin) Ltd -v- First Flight Couriers Ltd CA (Bailii, [2009] EWCA Civ 290, Times)
    The appellant entered into two aircraft leasing agreements but were unable to maintain payments. They appealed against rejection of their argument that the agreements were not exempt from the controls under the 1977 Act by being international supply . .

(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 30-Nov-15 Ref: 271150

JP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation; Comc 27 May 2008

References: [2008] EWHC 1186 (Comm)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Gloster J
Gloster J said: ‘terms which simply define the basis upon which services will be rendered and confirm the basis upon which parties are transacting business are not subject to section 2 of UCTA. Otherwise, every contract which contains contractual terms defining the extent of each party’s obligations would have to satisfy the requirement of reasonableness.’
Statutes: Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977
This case cites:

This case is cited by:

The National Home Loans Corporation v Hannah: 1997

References: [1997] CCLR 7
The borrower had first borrowed money on mortgage (the 1989 loan) to pay off an existing third party mortgage (as well as raising additional funds) and later paid off the new mortgage as part of the process of substituting that mortgage for a different one from the same lender. One issues was whether the 1989 loan agreement should be construed as falling into parts, so as to engage section 18(1)(a).
Held: The 1989 loan was an integrated package which could not be split up without altering its essential character and that section 18(1)(a) did not therefore apply.
Statutes: Consumer Credit Act 1974 18
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Heath -v- Southern Pacific Mortgage Ltd ChD (Bailii, [2009] EWHC 103 (Ch))
    The appellant challenged a mortgagee’s possession order saying that the loan agreements sought to be enforced were invalid and the charges unenforceable. The loan had been in two parts. She said that as a multi-part agreement it fell within section . .