Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 2399/1999 Generato dall'IA

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

Numero d'incarto KKO 2399/1999
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Finlandia (FI)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Respinto (Dismissed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

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.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

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.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
telephone charges liability consumer credit Act device malfunction proof third party call burden of proof Supreme Court Finland telecommunications liability uso del telefono cellulare alla guida

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Section 10 of the Consumer Credit Act
Generato dall'IA
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.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

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.