Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
KKO 2399/1999 KI-generiert

Supreme Court dismisses claim for phone charges when caller cannot prove device fault or third-party call.

Geschäftsnummer KKO 2399/1999
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Finnland (FI)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Abgewiesen (Dismissed)
Originalquelle öffnen Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The Supreme Court of Finland dismissed the claim for reimbursement of telephone charges. The appellant argued that the calls originated from a device malfunction or an unauthorized third party, but failed to provide evidence supporting these assertions. Consequently, the court ruled that without proof of fault or external interference, the appellant remains liable for the charges incurred.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Section 10 of the Consumer Credit Act; Section 10 of the Consumer Credit Act: A consumer is liable for telephone charges unless they can prove the calls were caused by a device malfunction or made by a third party.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
telephone charges liability consumer credit Act device malfunction proof third party call burden of proof Supreme Court Finland telecommunications liability Verwendung des Mobiltelefons am Steuer

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
Section 10 of the Consumer Credit Act
KI-generiert
kko-other_1999_2398
Supreme Court dismissed appeal regarding burden of proof for disputed unpaid telephone bills where caller claimed errors.
kko-precedent_2012_54
Supreme Court dismisses forgery charges for changing IMEI code, upholds hiding conviction with fine.
market_1999_18
Consumer court bans unfair contract term allowing phone company to charge extra for payment delays.
market_1999_10
Consumer protection court bans adult phone services charging line holders regardless of actual usage.
kko-precedent_2001_91
Supreme Court upholds conviction for drug trafficking attempt and possession via phone instructions and payment arrangement.

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

A velvoitettiin maksamaan hänen puhelinliittymästään soitetut puhelut, kun A ei ollut saattanut todennäköiseksi, että sykäykset olisivat johtuneet laiteviasta tai että joku ulkopuolinen olisi voinut soittaa hänen laskuunsa.