- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-247/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Hannover (Germany) lodged on 29 April 2016 — Heike Schottelius v Falk Seifert
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016CN0247
62016CN0247
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 279/14
(Case C-247/16)
(2016/C 279/19)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Heike Schottelius
Defendant: Falk Seifert
Question referred
Can a principle of EU consumer law be derived from the second indent of Article 3[(5)] of Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees (1) to the effect that for all transactions in respect of consumer goods between non-consumers and consumers it is sufficient, in order to claim secondary rights under a warranty, that the non-consumer with warranty obligations has not completed the remedy within a reasonable time, and there is no requirement in that respect that a period of time for removing the defect be fixed expressly, and that the relevant provisions of national law, for instance also in the case of a contract for work on consumer goods, should be interpreted accordingly and if necessary applied restrictively?
(1) OJ L 171, 7.7.1999, p. 12.