Verein für Konsumenteninformation – CJEU Judgment (Austria, 2016)
CJEU precedent (Directive 95/46/EC, pre-GDPR)
This is a Court of Justice judgment predating the GDPR. It interprets Directive 95/46/EC (the Data Protection Directive). It is not a cookie or ePrivacy case and is excluded from cookie statistics and the Risk Calculator.
The Court of Justice of the European Union clarified that Amazon's choice of law in its terms and conditions must not deprive Austrian consumers of their legal protections. This decision is crucial for online businesses operating across borders, ensuring consumer rights are upheld regardless of the company's location.
What happened
Amazon's terms and conditions were challenged for potentially depriving Austrian consumers of their legal protections.
Who was affected
Austrian consumers purchasing from Amazon's website, which is based in Luxembourg.
What the authority found
The Court held that Amazon's choice of law should not undermine the consumer protections provided by the law of the consumer's home country.
Why this matters
This ruling reinforces that companies must respect consumer rights in cross-border transactions, ensuring that terms and conditions do not override local consumer protections. It serves as a guide for companies to align their legal terms with EU consumer protection standards.
Amazon EU is a company established in Luxembourg which, among other activities, via a website with a domain name with the extension .de, addresses consumers residing in Austria, with whom it concludes electronic sales contracts. The company has no registered office or establishment in Austria. The VKI, which is an entity qualified to bring actions for injunctions within the meaning of Directive 2009/22, brought an action before the Austrian courts for an injunction to prohibit the use of the terms in Amazon EU's general terms and conditions especially relating to the applicable law for its contracts. The VKI considered them contrary to legal prohibitions or accepted principles of morality. The court at first instance presumed that in principle the Rome I Regulation applies and, on the basis of Article 6(2) of that regulation, held that the clause on the choice of applicable law was invalid, on the ground that the choice of law should not have the result of depriving consumers of the protection afforded to them by the law of their State of habitual residence. The court concluded that the validity of the other terms had to be assessed in the light of Austrian law. The appellate court, to which both parties to the main proceedings appealed, set aside the judgment of the first-instance court and referred the case back to it for rehearing. It considered that the Rome I Regulation was relevant for the determination of the applicable law. It held that Article 6(2) of the regulation did not allow the conclusion that Amazon EU's choice of applicable law was invalid, and that in accordance with Article 10(1) of the regulation that term should instead have been assessed in the light of Luxembourg law. = The Oberster Gerichtshof (Supreme Court, Austria), to which the VKI appealed, is uncertain as to the law applicable in the main proceedings. In those circumstances it decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling:
Outcome
CJEU Judgment
A judgment by the Court of Justice of the European Union, typically on a preliminary reference from a national court.
Related Cases (0)
No other cases found for Verein für Konsumenteninformation in AT
This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.
Details
About this data
Cite as: Cookie Fines. Verein für Konsumenteninformation - Austria (2016). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu
Last updated: