Brussels, 22/03/2013 (Agence Europe) - Standard clauses in consumer contracts remain subject to review in terms of whether they are abusive, even if they only repeat measures set out in other categories of the contract, ruled the European Court of Justice in case C-92/11 on 21 March 2013.
The Court of Justice was asked about this by the German Federal Court because the Verbraucherzentrale Nordrhein-Westfalen (consumer association for North Rhine-Westphalia) is challenging before the German courts a standard contractual term by which RWE, a German undertaking supplying natural gas, reserves the right unilaterally to amend the price charged to its customers if they are on a special tariff (Sonderkunden). The consumer group says such clauses are abusive, but RWE argues that it should not be reviewed to see whether it is abusive because it is simply part of the general terms and conditions and refers to German contract law. The German court wanted to know whether this argument held water in respect of EU Directive 93.13.EEC on abusive clauses in consumer contracts.
The Court of Justice says such terms must be subject to review for unfairness if the statutory provisions they reproduce are applicable only to another category of contracts. Exclusion of review for unfairness of contractual terms that reflect the provisions of national legislation governing a certain category of contracts is justified by the fact that it can legitimately be assumed that the national legislature struck a balance between all the rights and obligations of the parties to those contracts. That reasoning does not apply, however, to terms in a different contract. To exclude a term in such a contract from review for unfairness merely because it reproduces legislation that applies only to another category of contracts would call into question the protection of consumers aimed at by EU law. When making that assessment the national court must work out for each case whether it meets the requirements of good faith, balance and transparency. The contract must set out in transparent fashion the reason for and method of the variation of the charges, so that the consumer can foresee, on the basis of clear, intelligible criteria, the alterations that may be made to them. For the case in question, the Court of Justice rejects the requests by the German government and RWE that the ruling be limited in time in order to reduce the financial costs. (FG/transl.fl)