Especially anyone who goes shopping both now gets nervous at first that they should not pay a final two-year bill from the activity of the new civil law. Although the minister was calm and calm, the sign of the end is not clear. We talked about the changes and different explanations of the first terms with the lawyer Tom Pelikn from the law firm Pelikn, Krofta, Kohoutek.
In the new Civil Code (NOZ) there is a term “voluntary mark for quality”, what exactly does that mean?
In the first law, which will apply from January 2014, we must pour the so-called guarantee for quality and finally the first buyer from the defective performance. The seller can provide a quality guarantee by declaring that everything will be caused for normal use for some time or that it will retain its usual properties. Sellers can extend the time for any time, what else they could do so far.
So what will the change specifically affect?
According to the NAO, the salary is paid for the indications of usability in the advertisements or on the packaging of the product. Therefore, when, for example, the advertisement announces that the car has been operating reliably for ten years and becomes immobile after five years, the client will complain to the dealer, even if he does not otherwise provide the day. In the event that the advertisement states a different time than the letter, the duration will apply. The purpose of this right is to protect consumers from various marketing practices of sellers and guarantee that the promises of taxes in advertising will be kept.
What will the seller ever state in advance for less than two years?
As before, it is true that a voluntary guarantee for quality does not exclude or limit the last of the defects. Therefore, even if the buyer agrees to shorten the seller’s liability, such agreement will be invalid.
The only exception is the situation when you buy the use of consumer goods, for which it is possible to reduce the time for the application of the first of the defective performance by half, ie one year. As a buyer, you must freely agree to such a shortening of the bag.
So far, they have become accustomed to a final two-year lease. Will or won’t it be a year? Is there a problem with you?
The dog is buried in the first terms. I don’t use the thermal lock, he just disappeared. There is no doubt in the problematic wording of the provision of Article 2165 (1) of the CCC: “The buyer is entitled to claim the first of the defect, which occurs in consumer goods within twenty months of receipt.” Speculation has emerged due to the interpretation of the word “occurs”.
The furnace will appear clearly. I buy a product, after a year there is a defect and I go to complain in the cancellation…
That is not so clear. The problematic term “occurrence of defects” in accordance with the European directive means that for the ultimate responsibility of the seller for defects NOZ requires that the defect has it in the time before the buyer and manifests (occurred) during the following six months. The period of twenty-three months is then the deadline for claiming defects at the seller, or for complaints.
I admit, I’m not very wise about that.
The problem is due to another established NOZ, which stipulates that “the first buyer of a defective full-fledged defect, which he may have when passing the danger code to the seller, would manifest itself later” (2100 NOZ). The moment of passing the danger is the moment when the buyer takes over. And to make matters worse, he also enshrines the so-called rebuttable presumption that if the defect manifests itself within six months from the transfer, it is considered that everything was defective when transferring (a similar right is in 616 of the current civil law).
Wouldn’t there be a treasure?
If you buy a TV that does not work when connected, you can complain about it. If the defect manifests itself within a year after purchase, the defect is considered to be a defect existing at the time of acceptance, unless the seller is able to prove that the defect did not exist at the time of acceptance. If the television stops working a year after the sale, you can complain about the defect, but you had to prove that the defect existed when you took it.
But that would be a shift to the hormone, wouldn’t it?
It is true, this deposit limited the seller’s liability for defects compared to the previous first known limit. On the other hand, it is necessary that there should be a shift towards standardization to the first rights in the European scale, or perhaps with the exception of Slovakia, which is based on the same concept of a common socialist civic end. 40/1964 Coll., We would hardly look for another European country in which the two-year bill is prescribed by the seller. Likewise, the European directive regulating the first buyers of defects does not prescribe the final harvest time.
would really be the real thing? Furnaces and ministries and consumer associations commented on this. Vichnitvrd, e ve zstane pi starm.
It is true that, for the first time, the reasons for the NOZ do not mean that such a fundamental change in the area of the Czech first consumer protection law would finally be confused by the creators. The opinion that the two-year mark will remain the same, the other joint press release in mid-May also confirmed the Ministry of Justice and Industry and Trade. According to them, the two-year final cancellation should be retained, it does not apply only if the buyer defects the fault when taking over, you have to buy a quality class, or if he may have caused the defect.
To this end, however, it is necessary to add that one ministry does not request binding deposits, so the only final interpretation of the problematic norm will be and decided by the court.
What about European legislation?
The Directive allows Member States to ensure the level of consumer protection through national regulations. The two-year end period is therefore not in conflict with the first of the European Union, and in the first place there is to be.
And what do you think about it?
I think that buyers will be stalked by the season. It is not to be expected that the seller would deprive consumers of such a first word of the first of the final cancellation, to the extent that the consumer has relied on it so far. The rest of most manufacturers and sellers today provide a two-year or even share of voluntary customs in Europe, where otherwise they do not have to.
An unequivocal answer to the question of whether the first law will be further extended to include a two-year final bill will provide the court’s decision. But we will have to repent of it for several years. Here, however, it is certain that NOZ will not fully kill the quality and unambiguous foundation of modern civil law, or it will clearly and comprehensibly affect all areas of everyday life of citizens.