Press

On October 4, 2024, the Dutch Supreme Court ruled that a button with just the text 'Place Order'—used by many online stores—does not meet legal requirements. This means consumers are entitled to a (partial) refund for purchases made using such unclear buttons.

Good news for you!
Aankoopclaim had already filed a lawsuit against Bol.com on behalf of consumers before the ruling, and now that our stance has been confirmed, we will approach other webshops to ensure consumers get their money back.

Want to get your money back too?
Don't miss this opportunity! Sign up now, upload your invoices, and let us help you reclaim your money.

We have filed lawsuits on behalf of individual consumers against webshops that are violating their information obligations and aim to recover money for the consumers who have registered with us.

AankoopClaim has repeatedly contacted the webshops to discuss the breaches of information obligations. Some webshops did not respond, while with others, we engaged in extensive negotiations. Ultimately, the webshops were not willing to come up with a serious settlement proposal.

This has led us to decide to take legal action. Through the lawsuits, we want to show the webshops what is going wrong in their ordering process. By doing so, we will directly recover money for the consumers who have registered with us. Want to join? Sign up!

The subdistrict court in North Holland has ruled that Greenwheels did not fulfill all its information obligations. It was found that the consumer was not informed about their right of withdrawal, and Greenwheels could not provide the confirmation letter from the consumer which should have included various information obligations. The subdistrict court reviewed previous rulings from the Supreme Court and decisions from European judges. The court concluded that an appropriate measure must be applied to effectively protect the consumer. Therefore, the subdistrict court ruled that the consumer is obligated to pay 25% less to Greenwheels.

The court in Rotterdam ruled on whether bol.com provided sufficient information to consumers in accordance with legal requirements. Due to the violation of certain information obligations, the consumer's payment obligation is reduced by 25%. The ruling emphasizes the necessity for clear and comprehensible information in online sales, including details about the product, the price, the seller's identity, and the consumer's rights. The court concluded that bol.com failed to meet its information obligations in certain respects.

A judge ruled that an online store wasn't clear enough about canceling a purchase. The information was present on the site, but the consumer had to search for it. That's not allowed: the details should be easily accessible, and the consumer should actively agree to it, for example by checking a box. Because the online store didn't adhere to these rules, the judge decided that the consumer should pay 25% less.

The local court has ruled that energy supplier Engie failed to meet several essential information obligations when concluding an online contract with a consumer. As a result, the consumer's payment obligation is reduced by 50%.

The breaches pertain to information about the duration and termination period of the agreement, the right to dissolve the contract, and the ambiguity of the order button. Due to these breaches, Engie faces sanctions.

The local court in Amsterdam has ruled that Bol.com's order button did not meet legal requirements, as it did not clearly indicate that clicking on the button would entail a payment obligation.

The judge based the decision on prior rulings from the European Court of Justice. This ruling could have significant implications for Bol.com and other online retailers, emphasizing the need for clear indication of a payment obligation on the order button.

European consumer law imposes strict regulations on online retailers, and judges are becoming more proactive in their oversight. Failure to comply not only risks fines from the ACM but also the annulment of agreements by the court and recoupment from consumers.

This heightened judicial involvement, even without specific requests from consumers, means that online retailers must be extremely diligent in complying with consumer legislation to avoid serious financial and reputational damage.

The European Court of Justice has ruled that websites, like Booking.com, must clearly indicate that there's a payment obligation when placing an order. This decision followed a case where a man didn't want to pay for his hotel reservation. The website had only mentioned 'Complete booking'.

The Court demands an explicit indication of the payment obligation on the order button. If the order button is unclear, the consumer is not bound to the agreement. Consequently, the consumer is not obligated to pay.