Derecho de desistimiento y faltas informativas relativas al precio

• Lídia Arnau Raventós ^[1]
  1. [1] Universitat de Barcelona

     Universitat de Barcelona

     Barcelona, España

     
• Localización: Revista Electrónica de Direito. RED, ISSN-e 2182-9845, Vol. 34, Nº. 2, 2024
• Idioma: varios idiomas
• Títulos paralelos:
  • Right of withdrawal and lack of information relative to the price
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Resumen
  • español

    El comentario que sigue se inspira en la STJUE 5.10.2023, Sofatutor, relativa a un contrato de servicios celebrado electrónicamente. El TJUE resuelve que si, al contratar, no se informa al consumidor que, tras un primer período de prestación gratuita de los servicios, el contrato deviene oneroso y prorrogable, sin informar tampoco el precio, entonces procede reconocerle una segunda facultad de desistir del contrato ya oneroso. El estudio analiza de qué modo las faltas informativas acaban incidiendo en la disciplina del derecho a desistir. Y se presta especial atención al deber precontractual y pericontractual de informar, en concreto, acerca del precio a efectos de determinar cómo repercute su infracción en la eficaz perfección del contrato (art. 6.1, letra e y art. 8.2.I DDC).

  • English

    The comment that follows is inspired by Judgement of the CEU 5.10.2023 Sofatutor, relating to a service contract concluded electronically. The CJUE resolves that if, when contracting, the consumer is not informed that, after a first period of free provision of services, the contract becomes onerous, without also informing the price, then it is appropriate to recognize him a second right of withdrawal of the onerous contract. The study analyzes how lack of information ends up affecting the discipline of the right of withdrawal. An special attention is devoted to the precontractual and pericontractual duty to inform, specifically about the price, in order to determinate how it affects the effective conclusion of the contract (art.

    6.1,e and 8.2.I DDC). Regarding contracts through electronics means, the conclusion reach is that the only thing that prevents the consumer from being obligated is the fact that the contracting process has not been articulated in such way that it is essencial, for the consumer, to expressly confirm that it is aware of the onerous nature of the contract (art. 8.2.II DDC).

    Contractual efectiveness is linked to the expresión of knowledge of the obligation to pay but does not depend on the information and knowledge of the price. If that contractual efectiveness does not occur and, therefor, the consumer is not bound, it is unnecessary to attribute him the right of withdrawal because there nothing to withdraw from.