In its ruling of 10.06.2016 (Ref.: 4 U 217/15), the Higher Regional Court of Karlsruhe determined that the consumer protection regulations on the right of withdrawal are not applicable to purchases at trade fairs. The trade fair stand is considered a movable business premises. In this case, the customer is not exposed to any risk of being overcharged.
Information about the right of withdrawal
The protection of consumers has become an essential task, especially on the Internet. If you wish to withdraw from a legal transaction at a later date, you have the right to cancel the contract at a later date, particularly in the case of distance selling contracts. In this context, the seller is obliged to provide sufficient information in advance about the possibility of withdrawing from the contract.
No duty of disclosure for trade fair stand
In its decision, the court had to deal with whether the duty to provide information also applies at a trade fair stand. The decisive criterion is whether the purchase was concluded outside or inside business premises. If the contract is concluded off-premises, the customer is more worthy of protection.
The decisive factor is therefore the location and the circumstances in which the customer purchases the goods. The judges ruled that an exhibition stand is a movable business premises within the meaning of Section 312 b para. 2 BGB is. For this reason, the customer is not particularly worthy of protection and there is no obligation on the part of the seller to provide information.
Exhibition stands are movable business premises
The Higher Regional Court of Karlsruhe considers market and trade fair stands to be business premises if the seller usually offers his services at such sales stands. It bases this on the recurrence of the activity at different locations. This is regularly to be expected at trade fair stands and does not take the customer by surprise.
With this assessment, the Karlsruhe Higher Regional Court follows the decision of the Freiburg Regional Court of 22.10.2015 (Ref.: 14 O 176/15). It shows a detailed examination of the protective purpose of the statutory provisions. The court rightly does not overstretch the application of Section 312 d BGB and considers the conduct of the defendant seller to be lawful.
