Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2018:378
Date: 2018-05-31
Language of the case: Bulgarian
Subject matter: Consumer protection;Approximation of laws
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Bulgaria

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 4 October 2018 1. Consumer protection — Unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices — Directives 2005/29 and 2011/83 — Scope — Concept of trader — Functional interpretation (European Parliament and Council Directives 2005/29, Art. 2(b) and (d) and 2011/83, Art. 2(2)) 2. Consumer protection — Unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices — Directive 2005/29 — Scope — Commercial practice — Concept — Practice not originating from a trader — Not included (European Parliament and Council Directive 2005/29, Art. 2(d)) 3. Consumer protection — Unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices — Directives 2005/29 and 2011/83 — Scope — Concept of trader — Natural person publishing on a website advertisements offering new and second-hand goods for sale — Not included — Conditions — Consequences (European Parliament and Council Directives 2005/29, Art. 2(b) and (d) and 2011/83, Art. 2(2)) 1. See the text of the decision. (see paras 30-35) 2. See the text of the decision. (see paras 41, 42) 3. Article 2(b) and (d) of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’) and Article 2(2) of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council must be interpreted as meaning that a natural person, such as the defendant in the main proceedings, who publishes simultaneously on a website a number of advertisements offering new and second-hand goods for sale can be classified as a ‘trader’, and such an activity can constitute a ‘commercial practice’, only if that person is acting for purposes relating to his trade, business, craft or profession, this being a matter for the national court to determine, in the light of all relevant circumstances of the individual case. (see para. 45, operative part)