GREECE Law and Practice Contributed by: Dimitris Emvalomenos, Bahas, Gramatidis & Partners
variety of entities with respect to their activities. Unfortunately, there are no central records or other e-bases listing such fines and the judicial development of the respective administrative decisions that imposed them since the person/ entity fined may challenge the decision before the administrative courts. Based on the review carried out for the years since 2019 in case law bases, most of the imposed fines concern abusive general terms and conditions mainly of banks and insurance companies (especially regarding hospitalisation expenses) and various types of unfair/misleading commercial practices, including advertising and labelling, valued no more than EUR100,000 as a rule and excep - tionally up to around EUR700,000 (although usually decreased when they are challenged). Fines for product safety breaches are very rare. Indicatively, the author would mention Decision No 435/2020 of the Athens Administrative Court of Appeal which confirmed a fine of EUR9,000 imposed for the placing into the market of unsafe children’s clothes (determining this as reason - able in the circumstances of that case). 2. Product Liability 2.1 Product Liability Causes of Action and Sources of Law The causes of action for product liability range from strict liability for a manufacturer to admin - istrative and criminal liability. More specifically, these can be explained as follows. • Strict liability – this derives from the PLD as transposed into Greek law by Law 2251 (see 1.1 Product Safety Legal Framework ). Article 6, paragraph 1 of Law 2251 provides that “the producer shall be liable for any damage caused by a defect in his product” . There - fore, the prerequisites for a manufacturer to
be held liable are: (i) a product placed on the market by the manufacturer being defec - tive; (ii) damage that has occurred; and (iii) a causal link between the defect and the dam - age (considered under the theory of “causa adequata” ). The strict liability regime does not preclude other liability systems from provid - ing a consumer with greater protection in a specific case (Article 14, paragraph 5 of Law 2251). • Contractual liability – this requires a contrac - tual relationship between the parties where the buyer may not necessarily be a consumer (Articles 513 ff. of the Greek Civil Code (GCC) on contracts of sale of goods, as in force, following the transposition of Directive (EU) 2019/77 “on certain aspects concerning con- tracts for the sale of goods” (which, among others, repealed Directive 1999/44/EC), by Law 4967/2022 (in force as of 9 Septem - ber 2022). A seller may be strictly liable, ie, irrespective of fault, for the lack of conformity of the sold product with the sales contract at the time the risk passes to the buyer, as such conformity is defined by law. The knowledge of the buyer releases the seller from liability under stipulated conditions, among other reasons for such release (in particular Articles 534–540 of the GCC). • Tortious liability – the claimant must establish the defendant’s fault in tort claims. However, case law reverses the burden of such proof in favour of the claimant/consumer based on the “theory of spheres” , thus obliging the defendant to prove absence of fault in order to be released from liability (in particular, Arti - cles 914, 925 and 932, together with Articles 281 and 288 of the GCC and case law). • Criminal and administrative liability – these derive from the Greek Criminal Code and Law 4177/2013 on “Rules Regulating the Market of Products and the Provision of Services” , as
123 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook