- 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-429/24, St. Kliment Ohridski Primary Private School: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 30 April 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad – Bulgaria) – St. Kliment Ohridski Primary Private School EOOD v QX (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Directive 2011/83/EU – Concept of consumer – Article 2(1) – Concept of service contract – Article 2(6) – Enrolment contracts for the schooling of children of compulsory school age – Private education – Article 27 – Inertia selling of services – Compulsory subjects in accordance with national education standards)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CA0429
62024CA0429
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C series
—
C/2025/3255
(Case C-429/24,
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive 2011/83/EU - Concept of ‘consumer’ - Article 2(1) - Concept of ‘service contract’ - Article 2(6) - Enrolment contracts for the schooling of children of compulsory school age - Private education - Article 27 - Inertia selling of services - Compulsory subjects in accordance with national education standards)
(C/2025/3255)
Language of the case: Bulgarian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: St. Kliment Ohridski Primary Private School EOOD
Defendant: QX
Operative part of the judgment
Article 2(1) of Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and the Council,
must be interpreted as meaning that:
a parent who alone has concluded an enrolment contract with a private educational establishment, registered as a commercial entity, for the schooling of his or her children of compulsory school age is covered by the concept of ‘consumer’ within the meaning of that provision;
a pupil attending that establishment under such a contract is not covered by that concept.
Article 2(6) of Directive 2011/83
must be interpreted as meaning that an enrolment contract for the schooling of children of compulsory school age, concluded between a parent and a private educational establishment registered as a commercial entity, in return for payment of school fees by that parent, is covered by the concept of a ‘service contract’ within the meaning of that provision.
Article 27 of Directive 2011/83
must be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of an enrolment contract concluded between a parent and a private educational establishment:
that parent cannot be exempted from the obligation to pay the school fees stipulated in that contract on the ground that that parent or his or her child has not requested that that child be taught a specific subject, where the teaching thereof is compulsory in accordance with national education standards;
that article does not apply to a situation in which that parent or his or her child is not satisfied with the quality of the education services provided under that contract, since that situation comes within the scope of national contract law.
(1) OJ C C/2024/5082.
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3255/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—