Site that only publishes advertisement is not responsible for business that w...

nila44 · 发表于 2024-3-14 14:27:13

Business website that operates as a mere hub for sellers and buyers, offering its platform only to publicize advertisements, cannot be seen as a negotiator. Therefore, it cannot be held responsible for frustrations and losses suffered by the parties.

Istockphoto
According to TJ-RS, it was proven that all negotiations were carried out directly by the parties, via email, without any interference from the
Istockphoto platform
With this understanding, the 12th Civil Chamber of the Court of Justice of Rio Grande do Sul accepted an appeal and absolved a website from paying moral and material damages to a buyer who did not receive the purchased product. For the members of the panel, it was proven that all negotiations were carried out directly by the parties, via email, without any interference from the platform.

The plaintiff in the compensation claim, who B2B Lead lives in Montenegro, was interested in a motorcycle offered by a seller who lives in Greece. On March 20, 2014, after negotiations, he deposited R$5,300 into the account indicated by the seller — the equivalent of US$2,200. He promised to deliver the vehicle within four days, directly to his home.

However, things didn't go as planned. The author said initially that he had ''difficulties in negotiation'' and that the seller decided to transfer the motorcycle to Romania. Six months after the purchase, without the product and without a refund, he decided to sue the website to receive compensation for the loss. He requested the termination of the contract with the platform, due to the breach of good faith, the refund of the amount paid and compensation for moral damages.

Appropriate ruling
Judge Deise Fabiana Lange Vicente, from the 2nd Civil Court of the District of Montenegro, granted the action for termination combined with compensation as she understood that the website is responsible for the damages caused. She cited Precedent 221 of the Superior Court of Justice: ''Both the author of the writing and the owner of the publication vehicle are civilly responsible for compensation for damages resulting from publication by the press''.

According to the judge, the case in the case deals with a consumer relationship, where the plaintiff is considered to be insufficient, as provided for in the Consumer Protection Code (Law 8,078/90). ''In the case at hand, the quality of the service provided by the website is undeniable, which has control over its advertisers and the usage policy relating to the service that is offered, being able to stipulate more efficient criteria to avoid similar problems and more effective means. to resolve situations of non-delivery of goods'', he added.

''As the principle of good faith consists in the duty of the parties to act in accordance with standards of frankness and loyalty, it is the duty of the defendants to guarantee the suitability of the information provided through their website, bearing in mind that the author, by adhering to the published offer, he placed complete confidence in the services offered by it, being certain that, once the deposit was made, he would receive the goods within the previously stipulated period'', he concluded in the sentence.

barret506807552 · 发表于 2024-3-18 09:35:14

		自动登录	找回密码
密码			立即注册