Order No. 23238 of 2024: Consumer Protection and Defects in Sold Goods
The recent Order No. 23238 of August 28, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, addresses a crucial issue for consumers: protection in case of defects in purchased goods. This ruling emphasizes the importance of protecting the "weaker" position of the buyer, even when the good in question has undergone subsequent transfers of ownership. Let's analyze the details and implications of this decision.
The Legal Context of the Ruling
The Court of Cassation, with its order, confirmed the acceptance of a claim for damages due to a malfunction of a vehicle, even though it had subsequently been exchanged. This aspect is fundamental, as it highlights how the remedy provided by Article 130 of Legislative Decree No. 206 of 2005 (Consumer Code) applies not only to the first buyer but also to those who receive the good following a transfer.
- Remedies for defects in goods: consumer rights
- Principle of protection of the weaker position
- Compensation for damages and malfunctioning of goods
The Court's Headnote and its Meaning
Consumer protection under Art. 130 of the Consumer Code - Entitlement of the buyer even in case of subsequent transfers of ownership - Basis - Compensation for prejudice caused by the defective good - Identification of damage - Loss of value of the good - Exclusion - Basis - Case law. In the context of the sale of consumer goods, the restorative remedy provided by Art. 130 of Legislative Decree No. 206 of 2005 is also available in the event of subsequent transfers of ownership of the good, because the protection does not concern the good itself but refers to the "weaker" position of the consumer within the consumer relationship, and the damage, as the contract in question does not have speculative purposes, is not identified with the loss of value of the good. (In this case, the Supreme Court confirmed the acceptance of the claim for damages due to the malfunction of a vehicle subsequently subject to exchange, not with regard to the different realization value of the car but based on the proven malfunction of the vehicle).
This headnote highlights a fundamental principle: the consumer is entitled to adequate compensation for damages caused by a defective good, regardless of who possesses the good at the time of the compensation claim. The Court clarified that the damage should not be identified solely with the loss of economic value of the good, but must also consider the malfunction and the inconveniences caused to the consumer.
Conclusions
Order No. 23238 of 2024 represents a significant step forward in protecting consumer rights in Italy. It clearly states that consumer protection is not limited to the economic value of the good but extends to its actual use and the fulfillment of expectations related to the purchase. This jurisprudential trend reinforces the importance of informed choices by consumers and underscores the need for sellers to guarantee the quality of the goods offered. Case law continues to evolve in favor of greater protection of consumer rights, contributing to the creation of a fairer and more just market.
