Court:
Athens Court of Appeals, Decision No 2699/2000
Topics:
Consumer protection
Liability of the producer of defective product
Articles:
Article 6, Law 2251/1994
Articles 297 and 298, Civil Code
Facts:
On 20 February 1996 the claimant discovered extensive damage in his apartment due to the flooding of his loft. The flooding was caused by a defect in a thermo-boiler he bought from the defendant on October 1995, which led to the smashing of the cylinder-head gasket attached to the boiler. The total cost of said damages amounted to 3.702.823 drachmas (EUR 10.866,68).
Legal Questions:
Does compensation due to defective products cover all damages claimant suffered? What is the burden of proof for claimant?
Decision:
The Court ruled the compensation provided by art 6, Law 2251/1994 (Product Liability Act) includes any and all damages of the purchaser's assets, with the exception of the cost of the defective product itself and of the damages related to professional use of the defective product. Furthermore, articles 297 and 298 of Civil Code provide that the compensation should correspond to the difference between the status of the purchaser's assets at present compared to what such status would have been, had it not been for the damaging incident (the so-called difference theory). Purchase may not need to prove defendant's default.
Comments:
The decision verifies the full compensation rule for the party suffered damages with the exceptions provided under P/L Directive implemented by Law 2251.
Original text:
Click here to download this in pdf format.