Source: http://recent-ecl.blogspot.nl/2012/09/
Timestamp: 2017-08-18 21:56:37
Document Index: 281092562

Matched Legal Cases: ['CJEU ', 'CJEU ', 'CJEU ', 'CJEU ', 'Art. 4', 'CJEU ', 'CJEU ']

Recent developments in European Consumer Law: September 2012
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 11:34 No comments: Links to this post
The commission has issued today two regulation proposals with the intention to replace existing- and apparently obsolete- directives :
The objective is to enlarge and clarify the scope of EU legislation, improve the functioning of assessment bodies, achieve more transparency and match the regulation to the current state of science while revising manufacturers' rights and duties. The commission also seeks to foster international trade by "alignment to international guidelines".
Health and Consumer Policy Commissioner John Dalli said "Just a few months ago, everybody was shocked by the scandal involving fraudulent breast implants which affected tens of thousands of women in Europe and around the world. As policy makers, we must do our best never to let this happen again. This damaged the confidence of patients, consumers and healthcare professionals in the safety of the devices on which they rely every day. The proposals adopted today significantly tighten the controls so as to ensure that only safe devices are placed on the European Union's market at the same time, they foster innovation and contribute to maintaining the competitiveness of the medical device sector."
If you are curious to know more about how the regulations should fulfill this daunting functions, please have a look here and here.
Posted by Candida Leone at 14:37 No comments: Links to this post
Labels: consumer health, medical devices, product safety
This month BEUC published an interesting position paper on Re-directing Justice. This paper encourages the European Commission to redirect portions of fines that it collects when monitoring infringements in EU competition law. Some of this money should go to consumer organisations and consumer-related projects, it is being argued. It is an interesting concept that definitely deserves further consideration. There is a causal link between infringement of competition law rules and negative influence thereof on consumers. It makes sense to penalise parties infringing consumer protection by making them pay for further enhancement thereof. That could solve some of the problems of inadequate funding of consumer policy as well as, partially, fill in the gap that the lack of EU collective redress mechanisms left. Since there are no EU collective redress mechanisms, consumers cannot effectively claim compensation from the parties infringing their rights. At this moment, only the administrative fines may discourage the parties from infringing the competition law rules but all the collected fines are used within the Community budget. Redistribution of these funds to consumer organisations would still not compensate the victims of the infringements but could possibly contribute to strengthening of consumer protection and diminish the number of future infringements. Currently, certain Member States (e.g. Italy) allow in their national laws for such a redistribution of part of the administrative sanctions in competition proceedings to projects that would benefit consumers (e.g. Italian consumer information site was funded through money gained from such sanctions). Such national measures are still, however, exceptional and definitely do not fill the gap at a European level.
Labels: beuc, collective redress, competition, consumer protection
The minutes from a May meeting of the group Diet, Physical Activity and Health - A European Platform for Action are now available online. During the meeting the preliminary results of the annual report 2012 Platform monitoring have been presented, which show that the members of the platform promoted physical activity, worked on food reformulation (e.g., in line with the EU salt reduction framework) as well as introduced stricter definition of advertising to children.
A few new national initiatives have been presented. And so, in France in the period 2012-2013 'Increasing vending choice to promote healthy eating habits' initiative is to be implemented. The French Vending Association introduced a 'Feel Good' label in November 2011 that is being assigned to vending machines and not to the products. Vending operators may volunteer to participate in the program and they will get the label if they offer a specific minimum number of products from four categories: beverages, cereals, fruit and vegetables, and milk products. At this point ca 3.000 vending machines (out of ca 50.000) in France qualify for receiving the label and are able to offer more healthy choices to consumers. This development was possible due to new technological possibilities for vending machines sustaining different temperatures in various parts thereof. It will be interesting to see whether this initiative will be picked up by other Member States.
In Denmark specific action was undertaken to encourage industry to participate in the strategy of reducing salt intake by consumers. The goal is to reduce the daily salt intake by 3g by 2014. Aside the European framework and European-wide actions, the Danish government is looking into strengthening criteria for obtaining a keyhole label, which can be placed on 'healthier' products in terms, e.g., of salt. Special information campaigns are being conducted by the government, as well. Restaurants and catering in Denmark are being monitored to reduce the salt usage. Finally, industry of processed foods reported salt levels in their products and intends to adopt the lowest 40% fractile as its benchmarking target.
The BEUC announced during this meeting that it is looking into increasing consumer awareness about nutrition information in 'out of home' settings. Many consumers indicate that they would be interested in receiving this information, e.g., on calories, when they are eating out in a restaurant. The representatives of the European Modern Restaurant Association pointed out, however, that the European market for eating out is not uniform. In general, only 15% of European meals are consumed in restaurants. It differs by Member States whether consumers eat out in chain restaurants or SMEs. These differences may require different approach to providing consumers with proper information. Additionally, conducted empirical research shows that only 15% of consumers use calories information and there is no sufficient evidence that it changes consumer preferences.
A research conduced by the European Food Information Council in 6 countries showed that almost all surveyed consumers checked the price and 'use by' date of the product, but only 30% looked at the portion information. Many consumers think that a portion is the amount a person should eat and what a person is likely to eat and often perceive it as either of a right or small size. Another research showed that 46% consumers know how many calories per day a person needs, with women being more knowledgeable than men. Many consumers wrongly believed that children's energy requirements were higher than adults'. Most consumers underestimate energy expenditure, as well. Consumers perceive high calorie-high fat products as the most unhealthy. (How do consumers respond to portion information on food and drink labels?)
Additionally, information was presented on whether more attractive labelling of food could contribute to better knowledge of nutrition information. The results of a survey show that while well-designed labels can attract attention, that is not enough to increase consumers' motivation to read labels. Consistency and familiarity are more important than adoption of a particular format. It was recommended to put the information on the front of product packaging. (Nutrition labelling can guide consumers but a lack of motivation and attention stand in the way of healthier food choices)
Posted by Candida Leone at 18:44 No comments: Links to this post
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 12:34 No comments: Links to this post
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 16:27 No comments: Links to this post
Are consumers entitled to check their electricity usage or does that depend on their neighbours' ethnicity? - opinion of the AG Kokott in Belov (C-394/11)
20 September 2012: Opinion of the AG Kokott in Belov (C-394/11)
Mr Belov lives in a Bulgarian city in one of its districts known as 'Roma districts'. Throughout his city, Montana, the electricity meters are placed at a height of up to 1.70m, usually in the consumer's home or on the outside walls of the building, or on surrounding fences. However, in these two Roma districts the electricity meters were attached to electricity poles at a height of 7m. As a result, consumers living in these neighbourhoods cannot easily check the electricity meters and their usage data. The electricity company enables consumers to make an indirect visual check on condition of a written request submitted three days in advance by facilitating a use of a special vehicle with a lifting platform, free of charge. If a consumer in these districts wants to have a meter installed in his house, he can obtain it upon paying an installation fee. Mr Belov argued in his and other Roma name that they were being discriminated against on the basis of their ethnic origin.
1. Scope of the Directive - does it cover providing electricity meters to consumers free of charge?
The AG Kokott reminds in this case that Article 3(1)(h) of the Directive 2000/43 on equal treatment prohibits discrimination based on racial or ethnic origin with respect to the supply of electricity. The electricity meters are being provided by the electricity supplier according with its general contract conditions, which means they are part of the agreement on the supply of electricity. (Par. 59) The provision of the Directive should not be understood as only applying to the provision of the electricity per se, and not elements associated with it, like the meters. (Par. 60)
"Imagine if a public transport company earmarked different seats on buses according to the gender, colour or ethnic origin of passengers. Even though all passengers were transported and thus undoubtedly benefited from the transport service as such, it would be obvious that the specific conditions under which they are transported are not equal." (Par. 61)
While the Directive applies only to service provided for consideration and electricity meters are supplied free of charge, it is likely that the price thereof has been included in the price of the supply of electricity. (Par. 65)
2. Compatibility of national law - adding another requirement to recognise discrimination
The other set of questions asked by the Bulgarian court concerned the compatibility of the Bulgarian law with the Directive. Bulgarian law requires an infringement of rights of interests defined in law to take place in order to recognise the existence of discrimination. The Directive does not pose such a requirement - it is sufficient that a person is treated less favourably than another is, has been or would be treated. (Par. 72) The Bulgarian law by adding another, stricter requirement is incompatible with the Directive. (Par. 76) In the opinion of the AG Kokott, the Bulgarian court should try to apply and interpret Bulgarian provisions in accordance with the Directive. (Par. 78) If this is not possible, then Mr Belov may not invoke protection of the Directive directly, since directives do not have a horizontal effect. (Par. 79) The national court should, however, disregard the national legislation which is contrary to the prohibition of discrimination established as a fundamental right in Article 21 of the Charter. (Par. 80)
3. Burden of proof - 'presumption' or 'conclusion' of discrimination? Form of discrimination?
The AG Kokott decides based mostly on the linguistic interpretation of the Directive, that the burden of proof whether there was discrimination takes place after the party who considers themselves discriminated presents facts that allow for a 'presumption' of discrimination. (Par. 88) In the given case, the electricity company would likely have to present facts that would justify a commercial decision (made long time ago) to install electricity meters in the Roma districts differently than is normal in Bulgaria. This is justified by the fact that the relevant information should be in their sphere of control. (Par. 93)
The facts that have been presented to the CJEU point, pursuant to AG Kokott, at indirect discrimination, since:
"It is clear, however, that the two districts concerned are inhabited predominantly by people belonging to the Roma community. Consequently, the practice of attaching electricity meters at a height of 7 m is liable, in principle, to affect members of that ethnic group in a particular way and to put them at a disadvantage, since it makes it virtually impossible or at least excessively difficult for them to make visual checks of the relevant electricity meters." (Par. 99)
The submitted evidence suggests that the measure of installing electricity meters at a height of 7m was taken because of a large number of unpaid electricity bills and in response to many cases of illegal interference with electricity supply infrastructure, manipulation and illegal electricity extraction in these two districts. The national court has to determine whether the measure taken to prevent future fraud and abuse (legitimate aim) was proportional. (Par. 101-102)
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 15:51 No comments: Links to this post
Labels: cjeu, discrimination, ECJ, telecommunication
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 15:17 No comments: Links to this post
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 17:09 1 comment: Links to this post
This week is a European Mobility Week 2012 with this year's focus on 'Moving in the right direction'. There are many actions and activities organised throughout the EU that promote alternative modes of transport to citizens and encourage consumers to reduce private car use. The event's aim is to raise awareness of sustainable urban transport, leading to the reduction of the use of fossil fuels.
"In responding to the challenge to make our cities cleaner and safer, we have to find the right balance for our daily travel needs. We are all frustrated by traffic congestion, noise and pollution, and we know the risk of road accidents, but quite often our good intentions do not translate into sustainable mobility. This is why European Mobility Week supports the development of pedestrian areas and cycle infrastructure, the improvement of public transport, and brings together local communities. We call on towns and cities to join us in making the right choices for public transport, shared road space and smooth mobility for all" said Vice-President Siim Kallas. (European Mobility Week 2012 "Moving in the right direction")
The European Commissions announced a new public consultation on the urban dimension of the EU transport policy which will be open until 17 December 2012. The aim of the consultation is to examine how best to contribute on a EU level to high-quality and sustainable urban transport and mobility, so that a concrete proposal could be introduced by the European Commission next year. (Urban transport: time to move sustainably)
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 14:06 No comments: Links to this post
One of the growing health and economic concerns is the EU is... the increased amount of noise pollution. Increased noise from rail, road and air traffic, inefficient urban planning as well as noise from the industry is often the bane of consumers' daily lives. Traffic-related noise could be responsible for over 1 million healthy life years lost in Europe. Last Friday a new set of common noise assessment methods was published. Only upon collecting comparable data in the EU on noise levels to which people are exposed, it would be possible to set up a EU policy that would reduce noise pollution. The data collection should last till the end of 2013. (Speaking the same language on noise exposure)
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 13:44 No comments: Links to this post
Labels: consumer health, environment
The report of the European Law Institute's Working Party on the Common European Sales law is now available on the ELI's website. You can follow this link to download the report.
For an informative summary, please refer to Eric Clive's post on the European Private Law News blog.
Posted by Bram Duivenvoorde at 11:51 No comments: Links to this post
Posted by Chantal Mak at 09:29 No comments: Links to this post
No such thing as 'easily digestible' wine - CJEU in Deutsches Weintor C-544/10
6 September 2012: CJEU judgement in Deutsches Weintor (C-544/10)
Last Thursday the CJEU decided that wine producers may not label or market their wine as 'easily digestible' even if that 'health claim' is correct.
In order to protect consumers and assure that they are properly informed and not misled by 'creative' advertising in making their choice of products, the Regulation No 1924/2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods sets out strict requirements for safe and adequate labelling of food and beverages. Using the words 'easily digestible' on wine labels counts as a health claim, pursuant to the CJEU, especially when it is accompanied by a reference to the reduced content of substances frequently perceived by consumers as being harmful. (Par. 27) Art. 4(3) of the Regulation prohibited all 'health claims' relating to alcohol beverages, which means that wine producers cannot claim that since the specific wine has reduced acidity it is particularly easy or pleasant to digest (producing a beneficial nutritional or physiological effect in consumers, making them believe that their digestive system will not suffer or suffer just a little from, even repeated, wine consumption). (Par. 30-31) It does not also matter that the health claim in question may have been technically correct, since the specific wine was less acidic than other wines. The health claim still remains incomplete, since it: "...is silent as to the fact that, regardless of a sound digestion, the dangers inherent in the consumption of alcoholic beverages are not in any way removed, or even limited." (Par. 51) Therefore, even a correct claim can be misleading to consumers and is prohibited in order to ensure a high level of health protection for consumers. (Par. 52)
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 12:23 No comments: Links to this post
Labels: advertising, cjeu, consumer health, labelling, unfair commercial practices
On 26 and 27 October, the Groningen Centre for Law and Governance (GCL) organises a conference on the theme of 'Public policy, good morals and social justice in European private law':
'The focus of the session on Friday will be social-justice-inspired interpretations and applications of legal concepts of public policy and good morals as limitations to the validity of contracts and other acts of private autonomy (e.g. testaments). For what concerns contract law, the EU Commission, at least for the time being, does not seem to be willing to include a norm over immoral contracts or contracts contrary to public policy in its proposed Regulation on a Common European Sales Law (CESL). In the CESL preparatory works, a norm over illegality/immorality was proposed by scholars but this was not included in the Commission draft. Does this mean that there will be no European harmonisation of interpretations and applications of private law concepts of public policy and good morals altogether? Will this playing field for socio-economic justice in contract law remain the domain of national law? Or could perhaps some sort of European harmonisation take place through horizontal governance, especially horizontal judicial governance? A spontaneous, step-by-step convergence could be fostered by increasing judicial cooperation, especially if public policy and immorality norms are interpreted and applied in the light of the common European fundamental rights.
The Saturday session will be a round table on the comparison of the interpretation and application of public policy rules in private law, private international law and primary EU law in the light of EU fundamental rights and principles of social justice.'
More information regarding the programme will follow shortly on the conference website.
Conference visitors interested in questions of European private law might want to combine this event with (a part of) the Maastricht conference on 'EU law and the private sphere' that was announced on this blog earlier.
Posted by Chantal Mak at 13:31 1 comment: Links to this post
Labels: conference, european private law, public policy, social justice
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 16:11 No comments: Links to this post
Last week the Internal Market Committee of the European Parliament announced its doubts as to the sufficiency of the budget proposed for the 2014-2020 Consumer Programme. So far, 197 million euro was budgeted for proposed developments, mainly as far as safety, consumer information and education, redress and enforcement of consumer rights are concerned. While the Internal Market approves the main lines of the Consumer Programme and agrees to further, informal negotiations thereof with the Council, it would reshuffle certain priorities. For example, MEPs considered as very important the role of European consumer organisations in assisting and informing consumers, and therefore would grant them more funds than planned. Additionally, they proposed to finance an online portal for consumer organisations, which would lead to better cooperation and information flow among them. Another project that could be funded would be price comparison websites and certification labels for them. (Funding for the next EU Consumer Programme is inadequate, say MEPs)
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 15:46 No comments: Links to this post
Labels: consumer policy, consumer protection, European Parliament
Everything you always wanted to know about the EU...
...you may be able to ask the President of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, in an interview on the state of the European Union that will take place on 19 September.
See the Commission's press release for more information on how to submit a question.
Posted by Chantal Mak at 13:22 No comments: Links to this post
On 26 October 2012, Gary Low and Elise Muir (Maastricht University) organise a conference on the theme 'EU law in the private sphere - helping hand or officious intermeddler?' As they write in the conference announcement:
'The aim of this one-day international conference is to evaluate EU Law’s evolution from one initially limited to the sphere of public law to its increasing stake in regulating private relationships. Such an evaluation has fundamental and applied consequences for how a multi-levelled European legal order ought to be regulated: What is the extent to which EU Law’s regulation of private relationships is justifiable? How is the State’s traditional role affected? What is its impact on the current system of rights and remedies?'
More information and a tentative programme is available on the website of the Maastricht European Private Law Institute.
Posted by Chantal Mak at 12:39 No comments: Links to this post
Labels: conference, european private law
Distance is not a factor - CJEU judgment in Case C-190/11 Mühlleitner
The Court of Justice of the EU is back from holidays. Today, it handed down its judgment in Case C-190/11 Mühlleitner. The case concerned the acquisition of a car by Ms Mühlleitner, who resided in Austria, from Autohaus Yusufi in Hamburg, Germany. Ms Mühlleitner had found Authohaus Yusufi's offer through the internet and had then travelled to Germany to sign the contract and take delivery of the car. When a dispute arose concering a defect of the vehicle, the question arose whether the Austrian courts were competent to hear the case. Did the courts' international jurisdiction require for the sales contract to have been concluded at a distance?
The CJEU is of the opinion that the fact that the contract was concluded in the Member State where the seller is based does not mean that the consumer-buyer cannot bring a case in her own Member State. The decisive factor is that the seller's commercial or professional activities were directed at the State of the consumer's domicile:
'If, therefore, (i) the trader domiciled in another Member State pursues commercial or professional activities in the Member State of the consumer’s domicile or, by any means, directs such activities to that Member State and (ii) the contract at issue falls within the scope of such activities, the consumer may bring proceedings before the courts of his own Member State against the trader, even if the contract was not concluded at a distance because it was signed in the Member State of the trader.'
See the press release on this judgment for further information.
Labels: cjeu, consumer protection, distance selling, jurisdiction
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 15:37 No comments: Links to this post
Posted by Aleksandra Kunkiel-Kryńska at 09:37 1 comment: Links to this post
Imagine you are building a house for your family. You've hired a builder and an architect. After months of work, you are about to move in when after a storm you discover your roof is leaking. Let's say the architect made a mistake and forgot to add an isolation layer in his plans for the roof. Should the builder have noticed it and warned you about it? Should he have warned the architect? Can you claim damages from the builder, the architect or both of them? If you want to know the answer to these and other questions, check out my PhD book - The service provider's duty to warn about defects caused by third parties - that has just been published.
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 19:11 No comments: Links to this post
While internet is growing, the regulations that allow to maximise its use have sometimes some catching up to do. For example, in order to introduce and use wireless broadband services a certain radio spectrum needs to be used. The problem is that the radio spectrum is a scarce resource, and most European regulators already allocated all their radio spectrum, as well as strictly controlled its use. This means that providers of new wireless services would need to first re-allocate some old radio spectrum - which is an expensive process - in order for consumers to benefit from these new wireless services. What was needed was a more efficient plan of using the radio spectrum, and promotion of the idea of sharing it - across Europe. Therefore, the European Commission informed today that they are working on enabling wireless technologies to share the use of the radio spectrum. (Commission moves to foster wireless innovation through sharing of radio spectrum) What is important about this news is that the change on a European level would eventually grant many European consumers a better (and more affordable) access to wireless broadband services, greater use of wireless devices and new wireless services. (Maximising radio spectrum efficiency by sharing it)
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 14:52 No comments: Links to this post