Legal Literature detail
Article 3 9.
||Reference||B. Keirsbilck, ''Koppelverkoop is niet langer per se verboden, maar kan wel nog in concreto oneerlijk blijven, DCCR 2011, p. 115-137|
|Country||Belgium||Legal Literature date||2011|
|Author||B. KEIRSBILCK||Author initial|
|Title EN||Combined offer is no longer prohibited as such, but can still be qualified as ''unfair'' in practice.||URL EN||N/A|
|Title NL||Koppelverkoop is niet langer per se verboden, maar kan wel nog in concreto oneerlijk blijven||URL NL||N/A|
|Keywords||B2C, combined offers, financial services|
Article 71 of the Belgian Law on Market Practices and the Protection of Consumers states that a combined offer to the consumer is allowed as long as such a combined offer does not constitute an "unfair commercial practice" as defined in the articles 84 and following.
Article 72§1 however forms an exception to this principle and states that a combined offer to a consumer of which at least one component is a "financial service" and is performed by one enterprise or multiple enterprises acting with a common intent is prohibited.
The author claims that this exception is the result of an unlawfully broad interpretation of article 3.9 of the UCP Directive which authorises the member states to impose requirements in relation to financial services which are more restrictive or prescriptive than the UCP Directive in this field. Furthermore, the notion "financial service" must be differentiated from "financial instruments" which are excluded from the scope of the Belgian Law on Market Practices and the Protection of Consumers.
Hence, article 71§1 only comes into play when neither the main offer nor the accompanying offer concerns a financial instrument.