Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 2, 1. Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 2, 2. Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 2, 2., (a) Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 2, 2., (b) Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 2, 2., (c) Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 2, 2., (d) Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 3, 2. Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 5, 1. Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 5, 3. Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 6 , 1. Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 6 , 2. Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 6 , 2., - Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 6 , 2., - Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 6 , 4. Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 6 , 5. Consumer Sales and Guarantees Directive, Article 7, 1.

(1) Durable consumer goods are those which are intended to be used repeatedly and for a long period of time. To the contrary consumer goods in the strict sense, are those that are intended for a single use or for a very short or few times use.

(2) The law explicitly requires that all durable consumer goods bear a commercial guarantee, as an extended consumer protection measure. Guarantee in these cases must be in writing in the Greek language. Its content should include, in a simple, legible and comprehensive manner at least the trade name and the address of the guarantor, the exact product, the exact content (provisions) of the guarantee, its duration, the place where it is valid and the rights of the consumer in accordance with laws applicable. The guarantee must also be compliant with good faith and it cannot bear any excessive wavers in favor of the guarantor.

(3) Any violation of the above guarantee specifications and content does not affect the validity of the guarantee; the consumer can still refer to it and claim his lawful rights from the guarantee.

(4) The duration of the guarantee must be reasonable compared to the expected overall life span of the product. In particular, for high technology products, the duration of the guarantee must be reasonable compared to the period for which these products are expected to remain in the peak (from a technology point of view) - if this period is shorter than the estimated life span.

The plaintiff bought from the defended a cold air humidifier. The plaintiff, after fifty one days from the product's purchase, wanted to fill in the device with water according to the instructions. However, despite following the instructions correctly (as he did all the previous days too) the device didn’t work. The following day the plaintiff went to the defendant’s shop and delivered the device in its initial package and with the purchase receipt. The defendant, without unpackaging the product, informed the plaintiff that the device had a 30 days guarantee. The defendant also argued that the damage of the device was due to negligence and misuse by the plaintiff and therefore it was not a manufacturing defect. Moreover the defendant claimed that the guarantee does not cover cases of damages due to negligence and that the plaintiff had not indicated the type of the damage. The plaintiff argued that he was informed for the first time about the duration of the guarantee when he returned the product. He also argued that the defendant did not even offer to proceed to a technical service of the product.

The court rejected the defendant’s arguments as substantially unfounded. Given the fact that defendant bears the burden of proving the facts in support of its pleas, he failed to provide adequate proofs regarding his allegations. In specific the court held that the defended did not mention what were the provisions of the guarantee that had expired; the defendant did not even mention that a written guarantee was indeed provided to the customer. In addition, the argument that the damage of the product was due to the negligence or misuse of the plaintiff was vaguely alleged; the defendant did not identify the type of the damage that could be attributed to the plaintiff’s negligence or misuse. The court ruled that the essential facts that the defendant presented in support of its claims were proposed but not proved.

(1) What is the definition of the durable consumer good?

(2) In what way is the guarantee for the durable consumer goods provided and what is its mandatory content?

(3) Is the guarantee affected in case of violation of its mandatory content and provisions?

(4) How is the duration of a guarantee determined? Is this duration the same for all kinds of products?

URL: http://www.synigoroskatanaloti.gr/docs/reports/2013-01-23.%CE%A3%CF%85%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B1%CF%83%CE%B7-JUMBO.pdf

Full text: Full text

No results available

No results available

The court recommended to the defendant to carry out a technical service of the product by a qualified technician. If the damage is caused due to improper use, then the defendant should submit to the court a relevant report, sufficiently justified. If the damage is due to any other reason, the defendant should replace the product. Moreover, the court recommended to the defendant to comply strictly with the obligations set in the law regarding the mandatory commercial guarantee for durable consumer goods and the obligation of providing after sale services. Alternatively, if the products are not durable goods but rather destined for a single or a very short use , the defendant should inform the consumers accordingly. The court called the defendant to notify the court in writting, whether it accepts the present recommendation (plaintiff’s request was granted).