Economic operators should pay particular attention to the transparency requirements contained in consumer protection legislation from the moment contracts between professionals and consumers are drawn up and concluded, according to an analysis by the law firm PeliPartners.
PeliPartners specialists draw attention to the fact that the lack of an applied assessment of consumer protection legislation in relation to the specific activity of an economic operator may lead to possible limitations of their rights.
“At the European level, Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts provides as a general rule that, in case of contracts where all or certain terms are offered to the consumer in writing, these terms must always be drafted in plain, intelligible language. At a national level, the Directive is transposed by Law no 193 of 2000 on unfair terms in consumer contracts between professionals and consumers, which sets out the requirements to which economic operators must pay attention when they intend to conclude contracts with consumers. Under it, contracts will contain clear, unambiguous terms that do not require specialist knowledge to understand,” explained Cătălina Burcă-Andonie, Associate PeliPartners.
Transparency requirements can be better understood by analysing the guidelines issued by the European Commission on this subject, as well as the recommendations of consumer protection authorities in other European states.
European Commission guidelines on transparency requirements
“The Court of Justice of the European Union has at the same time consistently clarified in its practice that, for a contractual term to be transparent, it is not sufficient for it to be formally and grammatically intelligible, but consumers must be able to assess the economic consequences of the term or contract in question”, explained Cătălina Burcă-Andonie.
This broad interpretation of transparency implies that economic operators must provide consumers with clear information on contractual terms and their implications/consequences prior to the conclusion of the contract, a test which can prove burdensome without expert legal advice.
Recommendations from European consumer protection authorities
Similar recommendations for transparency have been issued by the Dutch consumer protection authority.
The authority has developed and published a guide adapted to the developments in the market following the evolution of online commerce, focusing on the limits that economic operators must observe in the process when persuading consumers.
With regard to transparency requirements, namely when assessing whether essential information has been omitted or concealed, the authority considers the actual context and the limitations of the medium used. From the perspective of the authority, on a website, an economic operator is almost always able to provide essential information.
The authority argues that it would be beneficial for consumers if this information were presented in several layers: the essential information should be clearly visible in the offer, with the possibility to access additional information via a different link. In this context, the analysis of PeliPartners shows that significant penalties that could be applied to the consumer by the provider should be clearly reflected in the offer, so that the consumer can tailor their behaviour or compare offers that include such penalties.
At the same time, if an economic operator also uses an app, a layered presentation of information could overcome the limitations of a smaller screen, which is why different media may require different approaches to inform consumers correctly.
Why is it important to comply with the transparency requirement?
Lack of transparency does not automatically lead to the unfairness of a given contract term. This means that, once it has been established that a contractual term is not in plain and intelligible language, its unfairness normally still has to be assessed according to whether it is likely to cause a significant imbalance between the rights and obligations of the parties arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer. Conversely, contractual terms which are perfectly transparent may be unfair because of their unbalanced content.
However, to the extent that contract terms are not clear and intelligible, namely where sellers and suppliers do not comply with transparency requirements, this circumstance may contribute to a finding of unfairness of a contract term, or may even indicate its unfairness. For online transactions, we believe that the risks to which the supplier of the good or service, namely the distributor/agent/provider of the platform on which these goods or services are traded, may be exposed, should be analysed. Thus, the service provider could remain liable for the unfairness of a contractual term and lack of transparency if the service was contracted through an online aggregator/platform that did not visibly display the relevant conditions to the consumer.
In order to avoid any misinterpretation to the detriment of economic operators as regards the transparency of the contractual clauses used, it is advisable that they constantly check both the terms and conditions used in the relationship with consumers and those establishing the intermediation relationship, in order to reconfirm that the clauses fall within the requirements and standards in the field.