header-logo header-logo

09 May 2014
Issue: 7605 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

EU—Consumer protection

Pohotovost s. r. o. v Vašuta C-470/12, [2014] All ER (D) 31 (May)

The referring court asked whether Council Directive (EC) 93/13 (on unfair terms in consumer contracts) (the Directive), in particular Arts 6(1), 7(1) and 8 thereof, read in conjunction with Arts 38 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter), had to be interpreted as precluding national legislation which did not allow a consumer protection association to intervene in support of a consumer in proceedings for enforcement, against the latter, of an arbitration award.  

The court ruled that neither the Directive nor the directives that had followed it, adding to the legislative framework of the protection of consumers, contained any provision governing the role which might or had to be accorded to consumer protection associations in individual disputes involving a consumer. Thus, the Directive did not govern whether such associations had to be entitled to intervene in support in such individual disputes. It followed that, in the absence of EU legislation concerning the possibility for consumer protection associations

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll