Case C‑32/12

Soledad Duarte Hueros

v

Autociba SA and Automóviles Citroën España SA

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia no 2 de Badajoz)

‛Directive 1999/44/EC — Rights of the consumer in the event of lack of conformity in a product — Minor nature of that lack of conformity — Rescission of the contract not possible — Powers of the national courts’

Summary — Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 3 October 2013

1. EU law — Direct effect — National rules of procedure — Conditions under which applicable — Respect for the principles of equivalence and effectiveness

2. Approximation of laws — Consumer protection — Sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees — Directive 1999/44 — Liability of the seller as regards the lack of conformity in the goods delivered — Appropriate reduction of the price where the lack of conformity is minor — National legislation not allowing the court to grant of its own motion a reduction in the price — Infringement of the principle of effectiveness — Not permissible

   (European Parliament and Council Directive 1999/44, Arts 2(1), 3 and 11(1), first para.)

1.  See the text of the decision.

   (see para. 34)

2.  Directive 1999/44 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State which does not allow the national court hearing the dispute to grant of its own motion an appropriate reduction in the price of goods which are the subject of a contract of sale in the case where a consumer who is entitled to such a reduction brings proceedings which are limited to seeking only rescission of that contract and such rescission cannot be granted because the lack of conformity in those goods is minor, even though that consumer is not entitled to refine his initial application or to bring a fresh action to that end.

   Such a system obliges the consumer to anticipate the outcome of the competent court’s analysis of the legal characterisation regarding the lack of conformity in the goods, which is final, making the protection provided for the consumer under Article 3(5) of Directive 1999/44 completely uncertain in nature, and thereby rendering that protection inadequate. This is all the more true where such an analysis proves to be particularly complex, with the result that that characterisation depends mainly on the manner in which the court dealing with the case carries out its inquiries. In those circumstances, that legislation does not appear to comply with the principle of effectiveness, in so far as, in proceedings brought by consumers in cases where the goods delivered are not in conformity with the contract of sale, it makes the enforcement of the protection which Directive 1999/44 seeks to provide to those consumers excessively difficult, if not impossible. It is for the national court to identify which national rules are applicable to the dispute before it and to do whatever lies within its jurisdiction with a view to ensuring that Article 3(5) of Directive 1999/44 is fully effective and to achieving an outcome which is consistent with the objective pursued by that directive.

   (see paras 39, 40-43, operative part)

Case C‑32/12

Soledad Duarte Hueros

v

Autociba SA and Automóviles Citroën España SA

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia no 2 de Badajoz)

‛Directive 1999/44/EC — Rights of the consumer in the event of lack of conformity in a product — Minor nature of that lack of conformity — Rescission of the contract not possible — Powers of the national courts’

Summary — Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 3 October 2013

1. EU law — Direct effect — National rules of procedure — Conditions under which applicable — Respect for the principles of equivalence and effectiveness

2. Approximation of laws — Consumer protection — Sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees — Directive 1999/44 — Liability of the seller as regards the lack of conformity in the goods delivered — Appropriate reduction of the price where the lack of conformity is minor — National legislation not allowing the court to grant of its own motion a reduction in the price — Infringement of the principle of effectiveness — Not permissible

   (European Parliament and Council Directive 1999/44, Arts 2(1), 3 and 11(1), first para.)

1.  See the text of the decision.

   (see para. 34)

2.  Directive 1999/44 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State which does not allow the national court hearing the dispute to grant of its own motion an appropriate reduction in the price of goods which are the subject of a contract of sale in the case where a consumer who is entitled to such a reduction brings proceedings which are limited to seeking only rescission of that contract and such rescission cannot be granted because the lack of conformity in those goods is minor, even though that consumer is not entitled to refine his initial application or to bring a fresh action to that end.

   Such a system obliges the consumer to anticipate the outcome of the competent court’s analysis of the legal characterisation regarding the lack of conformity in the goods, which is final, making the protection provided for the consumer under Article 3(5) of Directive 1999/44 completely uncertain in nature, and thereby rendering that protection inadequate. This is all the more true where such an analysis proves to be particularly complex, with the result that that characterisation depends mainly on the manner in which the court dealing with the case carries out its inquiries. In those circumstances, that legislation does not appear to comply with the principle of effectiveness, in so far as, in proceedings brought by consumers in cases where the goods delivered are not in conformity with the contract of sale, it makes the enforcement of the protection which Directive 1999/44 seeks to provide to those consumers excessively difficult, if not impossible. It is for the national court to identify which national rules are applicable to the dispute before it and to do whatever lies within its jurisdiction with a view to ensuring that Article 3(5) of Directive 1999/44 is fully effective and to achieving an outcome which is consistent with the objective pursued by that directive.

   (see paras 39, 40-43, operative part)