Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vaasan HO 05.04.1984 2451/83 AI generated

Consumer protection law applies to business-to-consumer sales of property packages even without explicit contract terms.

Case Number Vaasan HO 05.04.1984 2451/83
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Court of Appeal ruled that the Consumer Protection Act of 1978 applies to a purchase contract between a consumer and a business for a property package. The parties had disputes over the contract's application, with the court determining the transaction fell under consumer protection regulations. Consequently, the court upheld the application of the Act to this specific type of agreement despite the lack of explicit terms.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Consumer Protection Act 1978; Consumer Protection Act 1978: The Act applies to sales of consumer goods between consumers and traders, including property packages, regardless of whether specific contract terms were explicitly agreed upon.

Keywords

AI generated
Consumer Protection Act 1978 business-to-consumer sales property package contract consumer goods definition contractual terms applicability

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Consumer Protection Act 1978
AI generated
ECLI:FI:KKO:2019:13
Supreme Court dismisses appeal where company validly terminated century-old free milling rights after reasonable notice.
insurance_1982_2271-1982
Insurance court denied maintenance allowance due to low income, but Supreme Court ordered payment citing expanded military injury law.
admin_1998_turku-and-pori-county__538
Administrative court allows free legal aid in social assistance cases involving complex income calculation issues.
appeal_1974_helsinki__24
Tenant must vacate premises upon lawful termination due to landlord's own use and local housing shortage.
market_2018_435
Market Court dismisses damages claim for public procurement but orders reimbursement of legal costs due to procedural errors.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Yksityishenkilö A oli 30.10.1981 päivätyllä hankintasopimuksella tilannut osakeyhtiö B:ltä sopimuksesta ilmenevän, niin sanotun talopaketin ja sen toimittamisen A:n rakennuspaikalle ilman pystytystä sopimuksesta ilmenevin ehdoin. Myöhemmin oli asianosaisten välillä syntynyt oikeudenkäynti hankintasopimuksen soveltamisesta.

Hovioikeus on katsonut, että kysymys oli kuluttajan ja elinkeinonharjoittajan välisestä kulutushyödykettä koskevasta kaupasta ja että 1.9.1978 voimaan tulleen kuluttajansuojalain säännökset koskivat myös edellä selostetun kaltaista hankintasopimusta.

III-jaosto

Lainvoimainen