Failing to clearly inform students about the intention to demand additional tuition fees for the delay of the delivery date of the master's thesis is a violation of the teaching institution’s obligation to inform (which is an extension of the general duty of good faith).
It is also a violation of the consumer’s right to information, which can lead him to take a transactional decision that he would not have taken otherwise.
From the master’s programme regulations and communications sent to the plaintiffs by the defendant, it was considered to not be possible, for the average consumer, to understand the obligation to pay additional tuition fees.
As the defendant only demanded the payment of additional fees after the term of the granted delay period, the court considered that there were no contractual or legal grounds for imposing such obligation.