Revocation of distance selling contracts without grounds?

Are consumers prevented from revoking a distance selling contract on the grounds of abusive conduct? The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) must address the question of whether a consumer may revoke a distance selling contract by invoking an alleged low-price guarantee.

A consumer had ordered two mattresses from an online shop and, after their delivery, initially also paid for them. By referring to a cheaper offer from a competitor and a low-price guarantee from the online shop operator, the consumer demanded reimbursement of the price difference amounting to EUR 32.98. He threatened to revoke the contract with the online shop if this claim was not met. After the parties could not agree on a refund, the consumer revoked the contract in a timely manner and returned the mattresses received.

The online shop operator considered the revocation to be ineffective and refused to refund the purchase price. He took the view that the consumer had acted abusively since the right to revoke a distance selling contract exists only for the purposes of inspecting the goods and not to enforce unjustified claims based on an alleged low-price guarantee.

Court decision

The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) decided by judgment of 16.03.2016 – Az. VIII ZR 146/15 (Press release) – that the consumer is entitled to a refund of the purchase price because he effectively revoked the purchase contract.

This is not affected by the fact that the consumer sought to achieve a lower price for the mattresses. For the effectiveness of the revocation of a purchase contract concluded on the internet, it is sufficient that the revocation is declared within the prescribed period. The provisions concerning revocation are intended to provide the consumer with an effective and easy-to-use right to withdraw from the contract. Under the express statutory provisions, the revocation does not need to be justified.

An exclusion of the right of revocation on the grounds of abusive conduct comes into consideration only in exceptional cases, for example if a consumer intends to cause detriment to the seller.

Conclusion

A consumer does not need to justify the timely revocation of a distance selling contract. Therefore, it is generally irrelevant for what reasons the consumer exercises his right of revocation.