# C_2009090EN.01002001.xml

| 18.4.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 90/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.4.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 90/20

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Schorndorf (Germany) lodged on 2 March 2009 — Ingrid Putz v Medianess Electronics GmbH

(Case C-87/09)

2009/C 90/31

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Amtsgericht Schorndorf

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ingrid Putz

Applicant:

Defendant: Medianess Electronics GmbH

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Are the provisions of Article 3(2), and the third subparagraph of Article 3(3), of Directive 1999/44/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees to be interpreted as precluding a national statutory provision under which a seller, in the event that it has restored a consumer product to conformity with a contract of sale by way of replacement, does not have to pay the costs of the installation, in a particular unit, of the subsequently delivered product, in the case where the consumer has properly installed the contractually defective consumer product, if installation was not originally a contractual requirement? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Are the provisions of Article 3(2), and the third subparagraph of Article 3(3), of Directive 1999/44/EC (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees to be interpreted as precluding a national statutory provision under which a seller, in the event that it has restored a consumer product to conformity with a contract of sale by way of replacement, does not have to pay the costs of the installation, in a particular unit, of the subsequently delivered product, in the case where the consumer has properly installed the contractually defective consumer product, if installation was not originally a contractual requirement?

1

| 2. | Are the provisions of Article 3(2), and the third subparagraph of Article 3(3), of Directive 1999/44/EC to be interpreted as meaning that a seller, in the event that it has restored a consumer product to conformity with a contract of sale by way of replacement, has to pay the costs of disconnection, from a particular unit, of the contractually defective consumer product, in the case where the consumer has properly installed the consumer product? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Are the provisions of Article 3(2), and the third subparagraph of Article 3(3), of Directive 1999/44/EC to be interpreted as meaning that a seller, in the event that it has restored a consumer product to conformity with a contract of sale by way of replacement, has to pay the costs of disconnection, from a particular unit, of the contractually defective consumer product, in the case where the consumer has properly installed the consumer product?

---

(1)  Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees (OJ 1999 L 171, p. 12).

1

---