- 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-435/11: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 September 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — CHS Tour Services GmbH v Team4 Travel GmbH (Directive 2005/29/EC — Unfair commercial practices — Sales brochure containing false information — Treated as ‘misleading commercial practice’ — Case in which the trader cannot be criticised for any breach of the duty of diligence)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011CA0435
62011CA0435
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
23.11.2013
Official Journal of the European Union
C 344/11
(Case C-435/11) (<span class="super">1</span>)
(Directive 2005/29/EC - Unfair commercial practices - Sales brochure containing false information - Treated as ‘misleading commercial practice’ - Case in which the trader cannot be criticised for any breach of the duty of diligence)
2013/C 344/16
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: CHS Tour Services GmbH
Respondent: Team4 Travel GmbH
Re:
Request for a preliminary ruling — Oberster Gerichtshof — Interpretation of Article 5 of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22) — Brochure containing false information — Whether or not possible for a trader to show that the requirements of professional diligence have been complied with in order to prevent a commercial practice from being categorised as ‘unfair’
Operative part of the judgment
Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’), must be interpreted as meaning that, if a commercial practice satisfies all the criteria specified in Article 6(1) of that directive for being categorised as a misleading practice in relation to the consumer, it is not necessary to determine whether such a practice is also contrary to the requirements of professional diligence as referred to in Article 5(2)(a) of the directive in order for it legitimately to be regarded as unfair and, therefore, prohibited in accordance with Article 5(1) of the directive.
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 340, 19.11.2011.