12.01.2018

News

The burden of proof of a professional salesperson might be substantially greater

Sometimes purchases may have defects, that cause the buyers to file claims against the retailers. Whilst submitting the claim, the defect itself and proving the existence of the defect are essential. Generally, all parties have to prove their statements themselves during (court) disputes. However, some exceptions might occur, according to the new case law.

In a situation, where one of the parties is a professional retailer and the other party is a consumer, the burden of proof might be divided differently in some cases-, since the consumer is considered to be in a weaker position. In those cases, the professional retailer might have a greater burden of proof than the consumer. Additionally, the consumer doesn’t have to list the defects in great detail, a statement regarding the defects is considered to be enough.

The difference in burden of proof doesn’t apply automatically nor always, but depends on the circumstances. The Supreme Court has decided in one of their resolution from last year regarding a defected car, that the consumer’s burden of proof can’t be unlimited in a situation that requires in-depth knowledge. The Supreme Court found that if there is a need for in-depth knowledge, then the retailer must have a bigger burden of proof than the consumer, since the consumer can’t be expected to have such knowledge. In addition, the consumer might lack the possibility to prove that the defects exist in situations, where the defects have been fixed and defected part has been destroyed.

To avoid a situation where professional retailers lack evidence to defend themselves with, it’s wise to analyse the nature of the product, i.e. could they have defects, which would require in-depth knowledge, revise the terms and conditions of the contract and if possible, ensure as many evidence of the product being in accordance with the contract as possible.

Need help in this area? Contact Attorney Siiri Kuusik.

Latest news

NJORD Estonia: Sale of an immovable or cutting right

If there are mature trees on the immovable suitable for cutting, the landowner may at some point wonder whether to sell the immovable or the cutting right. It may be difficult to answer the question if one does not have any knowledge of forest management, no forest management plan or no clear idea of how to use the immovable in the future. Being at a crossroads, one should realise the legal differences between the two transactions.

NJORD has conducted training for Customs Board of the SRS

On December 6, Jana Panko, the Associate at NJORD Law Firm, participated in the seminar “Intellectual Property Right Protection”, organised by the State Revenue Service (SRS), representing, among representatives of other world-famous brands,  interests of the NJORD’s client  - widely recognizable manufacturer of watches and accessories, Daniel Wellington.

NJORD Estonia: What should you know about real estate reservation agreements

It is quite common that before concluding a real estate transaction, the buyer would like to reserve the object of purchase. Hence a real estate reservation agreement is concluded. The reservation period specified in the reservation agreement is typically used to get financials for the purchase in order. Additionally, the agreement allows for the opportunity for the interested buyer to calmly get familiar with the immovable and all the information about it. So, what should the parties know before concluding a real estate reservation agreement?

Get the latest legal news

We gladly share our knowledge with you. Subscribe to our newsletters.

Subscribe here