AKMV 
Withdrawal from the Purchase Agreement
Question
My problem lies in the fact that I ordered a pool enclosure from a Czech company. The purchase agreement stipulates an installation deadline of 30 June 2019. However, I still have not received the enclosure. They keep postponing the deadline, always providing a different reason. How long can they continue delaying this? When can I terminate the contract, request a refund of the deposit, and what is the procedure?
Answer:
For a more accurate assessment of your claims in the event of a breach of contractual provisions, it would be necessary to review the relevant contract (e.g., to determine whether the contract is governed by the Slovak Civil Code, whether consumer protection laws apply to you, whether grounds for withdrawal were contractually agreed upon, etc.).
In the case of contracts concluded under Act No. 40/1964 Coll., the Civil Code (hereinafter referred to as the “Civil Code”), it is generally possible to withdraw from the contract in cases provided for by the Civil Code, another law, or where agreed upon by the contracting parties.
Pursuant to Section 517 of the Civil Code, withdrawal from the contract is possible in the event of delay if the party in default fails to fulfil its obligation even within an additional reasonable period provided.
If your case involves a so-called consumer purchase agreement and your contract is governed by Slovak law, it is also necessary to consider Section 613 of the Civil Code, which provides: “Goods may also be sold on order. The seller is obliged to procure the ordered goods within the agreed period, and if no period has been agreed, within a period reasonable under the circumstances. If this does not happen, the buyer is entitled to withdraw from the contract. The buyer’s right to claim damages shall not be affected by the withdrawal.”
Question
I am writing on behalf of my partner.
He is burdened with debts from his previous marriage. Since his now ex-wife concealed the fact that she was not paying the mortgage installments, their house became subject to enforcement proceedings, and both my partner and his father were forced to declare personal bankruptcy (as the debts also included a consumer loan).
They went through a difficult period — divorce, debt, enforcement… So they reached out to Ms. Ing. XY, who provides economic, tax, and financial services, as she came highly recommended by an acquaintance for her helpfulness in dealing with enforcement proceedings.
Ms. XY advised my partner that someone from the family could buy the house for the outstanding debt amount of €27,500 and that he could buy the house back over time. Since no one in his family was able to help, Ms. XY proposed that one of her clients could purchase the house (as she knew the client had the financial means), with the understanding that the house would be bought back as soon as possible. In the meantime, they signed a lease agreement for an indefinite term with a monthly rent of €265 excluding utilities.
It has now been a year and a half. I would be willing to buy the house back (including a commission), so that we could live there together with my partner’s father.
We first tried to contact the intermediary, Ms. XY. She has been avoiding us and will not answer her phone. So we approached the buyer directly, who laughed at us and said she has no intention of selling the house and never considered it. She said we should be grateful we were allowed to stay. The buyer obtained a fully renovated house practically for free.
Had my partner known this would be the outcome, he would never have agreed to the proposed buy-back option. The house could have gone to auction, been sold for market value, the debts would have been covered, and perhaps some money would have remained. Before the renovation, the house was valued at €49,000, and now it is fully renovated with new wiring, flooring, roofing, fencing, and a garage…
In our view, this constitutes fraud, and we would like to ask for your advice regarding possible legal options.
Can this purchase be challenged retroactively? Or are we simply out of luck, having fallen victim to someone who profits from others’ misfortune and exploits their vulnerable situations for personal gain?
Please advise us whether there is any chance of reclaiming the house. My partner and his father are in a poor financial situation and are currently unable to afford legal representation.
Answer:
The legal system allows for a purchase agreement to be challenged on several grounds. For a more accurate assessment of your case, it would be necessary to examine the purchase agreement in detail, as well as to assess the circumstances surrounding the sale of the house.
The grounds for invalidity of a legal act are regulated by the Civil Code. Depending on the specific circumstances, the contract may be invalid, for example, due to conflict with good morals or due to usury.
According to Section 39 of the Civil Code:
“A legal act whose content or purpose is contrary to law, circumvents the law, or is against good morals, is invalid.”
According to Section 39a of the Civil Code: “A legal act performed by a natural person who is not an entrepreneur is invalid if someone exploits the distress, inexperience, mental maturity, agitation, credulity, recklessness, financial dependency, or inability to fulfill obligations of the other party and gains or promises to gain for themselves or another a performance whose monetary value is grossly disproportionate to the counter-performance.”
In order for the court to assess a particular situation as distress, it would examine the fulfillment of several attributes — whether the act was intended to resolve a specific urgent need, whether an act was carried out that would not otherwise have been undertaken, how the seller subjectively perceived the situation, whether the seller had the possibility to refuse the act, whether the act was disadvantageous, etc.
To succeed in legal proceedings, it would be necessary to prove the existence of one of the grounds for invalidity of the contract.
Consideration may also be given to the liability of the financial advisor for damages. However, in such a case, it would also be necessary to prove her liability for the damage.
Legal services
Question
Good day,
I sold my share of an apartment inherited from my deceased mother to my brother. I was paid the agreed-upon price, and a contract of sale for the share was signed. After several months, my brother decided that he wants his money back and will return my share of the apartment. For me, this is unacceptable. What are my brother’s legal options? The probate proceedings are scheduled to take place in February.
Answer:
If a purchase agreement for the co-ownership share of the apartment has already been concluded, a precise assessment of your brother’s legal options would require reviewing the signed purchase agreement. In general, the legal act that results in the termination of a purchase agreement is most commonly withdrawal from the contract.
Withdrawal from the contract is permitted in cases set out by law or in those agreed upon in the contract.
A statutory reason for withdrawal is provided, for example, in Section 49 of the Civil Code, which states:
“A party who has concluded a contract in distress under conspicuously disadvantageous conditions has the right to withdraw from the contract.”
Other cases of withdrawal (specifically for the buyer) are provided under Section 597 of the Civil Code:
“If a defect is subsequently discovered which the seller did not inform the buyer about, the buyer has the right to a reasonable discount from the agreed price corresponding to the nature and extent of the defect; if it is a defect that renders the item unusable, the buyer also has the right to withdraw from the contract. The buyer also has the right to withdraw from the contract if the seller assured the buyer that the item had certain qualities, particularly those specified by the buyer, or that it had no defects, and this assurance proves to be false.”
Question
Good day,
I would like to ask for advice. In July 2024, the Consumer Protection Act was amended, including changes concerning complaints. I would like to know whether these changes apply only to appliances purchased after that date, or also to appliances purchased earlier, for example in March. We bought a dryer less than a year ago and are now submitting our second complaint for the same defect. I read that the rule changed from requiring three complaints for the same defect to just two in order to return the product and request a replacement. A technician at the service center told me that this only applies to appliances purchased from July onwards, since that’s when the law changed. But I haven’t found this stated anywhere.
Answer:
Good day,
In connection with the amendment to consumer legislation, which also affected the area of complaints (for example, reducing the number of repairs for the same defect from three to two in order to request replacement or withdrawal from the contract), it is important to consider the so-called transitional provisions of the law.
According to Section 879y of the Civil Code:
“(1) The provisions of this Act in the wording effective until 31 October 2024 shall govern legal relationships arising before 31 October 2024; the creation of these legal relationships and the arising of claims from such relationships shall be assessed according to the regulations effective until 31 October 2024, unless otherwise provided in paragraph 2.
(2) Provisions of consumer contracts that conflict with the provisions of Section 53(9) and (10) in the wording effective from 1 November 2024 and in which the trader’s right under Section 53(9) in the wording effective until 31 October 2024 has not been exercised, shall not apply from 1 November 2024.”
From this, it follows that for appliances purchased before 31 October 2024 — including your dryer purchased in March 2024 — the rules effective before the legal amendment apply, that is, the legal regime valid until 31 October 2024. The new rules, such as the possibility to withdraw from the contract after just two identical defects, do not apply in this case.