Services Standards: Defining the Core Consumer Elements ... - ANEC

Hans-W. Micklitz
Horizontal
legislation
(means of
communicat
ion standard
terms)
Distance
selling 97/7
E-commerce
2000/31
Distance
selling of
financial
services
2002/65
Unfair terms
93/13
Credit,
package
tour, time
sharing
Transport (air
and railway)
Financial
services
(insurance,
investment,
payment)
Network
services for
customers
(electricity,
gas,
telecommunica
tion, postal
services)
Other services
in the Internal
Market (such
as contracts
with liberal
professions
and craftsmen)
No with
regard to
package
tours, 95
Yes with
regard to
time sharing
contracts 96 No 97 No Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Yes
As far as
undertakings
are privatised
2. International Private Law (IPL)
Yes, only
applicable to
these
services
Yes
As far as
undertakings
are privatised
As far as
undertakings
are privatised
International private law 98 remains important in those fields where EC law has
not led to harmonisation. This is true for all those consumer relevant services
95 At least in principle, but see Article 3 (2) third indent.
96 Although Article 4 (1) 94/47 provides for a concluding the contract in writing, however, this
can also be done by storing the contract on a durable medium, Article 5 (1) of Directive
97/7/EC on distance selling.
97 Including leasing, as decided by the European Court of Justice in easy car, ECJ,
10.3.2005, C-336/03, Easy Car vs. Office of Fair Trading, ECR 2005, 1974.
98 Wikipedia: “Conflict of laws, or private international law, or international private law is that
branch of international law and interstate law that regulates all lawsuits involving a ‘foreign’
law element, where a difference in result will occur depending on which laws are applied as
the lex causae. Firstly, it is concerned with determining whether the proposed forum has
jurisdiction to adjudicate and is the appropriate venue for dealing with the dispute, and,
secondly, with determining which of the competing state's laws are to be applied to resolve
the dispute. It also deals with the enforcement of foreign judgments. Its three different
names are generally interchangeable, although none of them is wholly accurate or properly
descriptive. Within local federal systems where inter-state legal conflicts require resolution,
(such as in the United States), the term ‘Conflict of Laws’ is preferred simply because such
cases are not an international issue. Hence the term ‘Conflict of Laws’ is a more general
term for a legal process for resolving similar disputes, regardless if the relevant legal
systems are international or inter-state, though this term is also criticised as being
misleading in that the object is the resolution of conflicts between competing systems
rather than ‘conflict’ itself.”
32