THE DIGITAL CONTENT DIRECTIVE AND POSSIBILITIES FOR A NATIONAL LEGISLATOR: THE CASE OF LATVIA
B) Continuous supply
4. A liable person for the trader’s right of redress
The Amendment Act deals also with determination of a liable person for the trader’s right of redress. The Latvian legislator continued the previous approach and extended it to the trader of digital content or digital service. Such approach took place by inserting words ‘digital content or digital service’ in the existing regulation included in the Consumer Rights Protection Act in such a way extending the existing regulation also to digital content and digital service.[41]
Thus, the trader, who has compensated a consumer for losses caused to the consumer or repaid the amount of money paid for the digital content or digital service, has a right of recourse against the person from whom the goods or materials were purchased.[42] Likewise, if conformity of the digital content or digital service with the contract has been caused due to the actions or inaction of the manufacturer, trader, distributor, or other person, the trader or the service provider is entitled bring a recourse claim against the relevant persons.[43] Yet the settlement reached by the trader with a third person on elimination of the defects of digital content or digital service, does not release that trader from direct liability towards the consumer.[44]
Such a response from the Latvian legislator should be perceived as reasonable and adequate.
The Latvian legislator did not create a separate liability regime for right of redress in the case of supply of digital content or digital service but extended existing regulation to digital content and digital service instead. Yet it should be noted that such an extension is based on a provision from the Digital Content Directive discussed above. Therefore, application of above national legal provisions should be carried out in the view of that Directive’s provision.
IV. CONCLUSION
The article analyses those few possibilities (envisaged in Article 10, second and third subparagraphs of Article 11(2), second subparagraph of Article 11(3) and Article 20 of the Digital Content Directive) of a national legislator envisaged by the Digital Content Directive concerning the regulation on supply of digital content or digital service. These possibilities are just narrow situations when a national legislation may adopt its own provisions either because the Directive explicitly allows it as it is in the case of the first two possibilities or indicates that a particular issue should be dealt with at the national level as it is in the case of the third possibility). The response of the Latvian legislator concerning the use of these possibilities was rather reserved as it does use only possibility to regulate the liable person in the right of redress which is a matter left for a national competence and its regulation, therefore, at the national level was unavoidable necessity for the Latvian legislator. Therefore, one may arrive at the conclusion that the existing regulation on supply of digital content and digital service in Latvia will be solely based on the regulation overtaken from the Directive except the regulation
160
concerning the right of redress left for the national legislator and regulated by the Latvian legislator.
[1] Directive 2019/770 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 on certain aspects concerning contracts for the supply of digital content and digital services, 22 May 2019, p. 1. [Digital Content Directive].
[2] For a discussion of this reform, see, for instance, P. GILIKER. “Adopting a Smart Approach to EU Legislation:
Why Has It Proven So Difficult to Introduce a Directive on Contracts for the Supply of Digital Content?”, in T.-E. SYNODINOU, P. JOUGLEUX, C. MARKOU, T. PRASTITOU (EDS.), EU Internet Law in the Digital Era, Cham, Springer, 2020, pp.299-320.
[3] Yet this differentiation is not always an easy task (see, for instance, K. SEIN, “The Applicability of the Digital Content Directive and Sales of Goods Directive to Goods with Digital Elements”, Juridica, 2021, pp.23-31).
[4] P. GILIKER. “Adopting a Smart Approach to EU Legislation: Why Has It Proven So Difficult to Introduce a Directive on Contracts for the Supply of Digital Content?”, in T.-E. SYNODINOU, P. JOUGLEUX, C.
MARKOU, T. PRASTITOU (EDS.), EU Internet Law in the Digital Era, Cham, Springer, 2020, pp.299-320.
[5] For a general overview of the Digital Content Directive, see, for instance, H. BEALE, “Digital Content Directive And Rules For Contracts On Continuous Supply”, Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law (JIPITEC), nº 3, 2021, pp. 96-110.
[6] Directive 2019/771 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 on certain aspects concerning contracts for the sale of goods, amending Regulation 2017/2394 and Directive 2009/22/EC, and repealing Directive 1999/44/EC, 22 May 2019, p. 28 [Consumer Sale Directive 2019].
[7] Article 4 Digital Content Directive.
[8] For the Digital Content Directive, see, for instance, Article 3(5) of that Directive.
[9] Article 3(10) Digital Content Directive.
[10] V. MANTROV, "Jaunā patērētāja pirkuma direktīva (Direktīva 2019/771): izaicinājumi un iespējas Latvijas likumdevējam New Consumer Sales Directive (Directive 2019/771): Challenges and Possibilities for Latvian Legislator, in: Starptautisko un Eiropas Savienības tiesību piemērošana nacionālajās tiesās", in Starptautisko un Eiropas Savienības tiesību piemērošana nacionālajās tiesās. Latvijas Universitātes 78. starptautiskās zinātniskās konferences rakstu krājums / Application of the International and European Union law in the national courts.
Collection of research papers of the 78th International Scientific Conference of the University of Latvia, Rīga:
LU Akadēmiskais apgāds, 2020, 319.-329.lpp.
[11] V. MANTROV, R. BIRSTONAS, J. Karklins, A. Kelli, I. Kull, A. Buka, I. Barkane, Z. Davida. The Implementation of the New Consumer Sales Directives in the Baltic States: A Step Towards Further Harmonisation of Consumer Sales, in: New Legal Reality: Challenges and Perspectives II. The 8th International Scientific Conference of the Faculty of Law of the University of Latvia, 21–22 October 2021, Riga. Collection of Research Papers, Riga: University of Latvia Press, 2022, pp.511-512.
[12] Law of March 18, 1999, Consumer Rights Protection Act. Its official translation into English available at https://vvc.gov.lv/image/catalog/dokumenti/Consumer%20Rights%20Protection%20Law.docx.
[13] V. MANTROV, R. BIRSTONAS, J. Karklins, A. Kelli, I. Kull, A. Buka, I. Barkane, Z. Davida. The Implementation of the New Consumer Sales Directives in the Baltic States: A Step Towards Further Harmonisation of Consumer Sales, in: New Legal Reality: Challenges and Perspectives II. The 8th International Scientific Conference of the Faculty of Law of the University of Latvia, 21–22 October 2021, Riga. Collection of Research Papers, Riga: University of Latvia Press, 2022, p.511.
[14] Article 4 Digital Content Directive.
[15] Article 11(2) Digital Content Directive.
161
[16] See F. ZOLL, “Article 11: Liability of the trader”, in R. SCHULZE, D. STAUDENMAYER, EU Digital Law: Article-by-Article Commentary, Baden-Baden, Nomos, 2020, p.206.
[17] Article 11(2) second subparagraph Digital Content Directive.
[18] Digital Content Directive, preamble, Recital 56.
[19] Article 11(2) third sub-paragraph Digital Content Directive.
[20] Digital Content Directive, preamble, Recital 58.
[21] See also For a discussion of Article 20 of the Digital Content Directive, see D. MOŽINA, “Article 20: Right of redress”, in R. SCHULZE, D. STAUDENMAYER, EU Digital Law: Article-by-Article Commentary, Baden-Baden, Nomos, 2020, p.209.
[22] Article 11(3) second subparagraph Digital Content Directive.
[23] Article Digital Content Directive, preamble, Recital 40.
[24] Regulation 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), 04 May 2016, p. 1.
[25] Digital Content Directive, preamble, Recital 39.
[26] For a discussion of Article 20 of the Digital Content Directive, see D. MOŽINA, “Article 20: Right of redress”, in R. SCHULZE, D. STAUDENMAYER, EU Digital Law: Article-by-Article Commentary, Baden-Baden, Nomos, 2020, pp.321-329.
[27] Article 20 second sentence Digital Content Directive.
[28] For a brief discussion of the use of these possibilities in the Baltic region in respect of the three Baltic States, see V. MANTROV, R. BIRSTONAS, J. Karklins, A. Kelli, I. Kull, A. Buka, I. Barkane, Z. Davida. The Implementation of the New Consumer Sales Directives in the Baltic States: A Step Towards Further Harmonisation of Consumer Sales, in: New Legal Reality: Challenges and Perspectives II. The 8th International Scientific Conference of the Faculty of Law of the University of Latvia, 21–22 October 2021, Riga. Collection of Research Papers, Riga: University of Latvia Press, 2022, pp.511-512.
[29] Article 33 Consumer Rights Protection Act.
[30] Materials concerning the draft Amendment Act are available on the webpage of the Latvian Parliament,
available at
https://titania.saeima.lv/LIVS13/SaeimaLIVS13.nsf/webSasaiste?OpenView&restricttocategory=1179/Lp13.
[31] See, for instance, J. KARKLINS, V.MANTROV, “The Place of Contract for Digital Thing in Latvian Contract Law Within the Context of the Consumer Sale Directives 2019”, Journal of the University of Latvia
‘Law’, 2021, No 14, pp. 68-79.
[32] Ziņojums par likumprojekta “Grozījumi Patērētāju tiesību aizsardzības likumā” (Nr. 1179/Lp13) zinātnisko sākotnējo izvērtējumu (ex ante) [Report on the Scientific Preliminary Assessment (ex ante) of the Draft Law
“Amendments to the Consumer Rights Protection Law” (No. 1179/Lp13)]. Available in Latvian at https://titania.saeima.lv/LIVS13/saeimalivs13.nsf/0/0FD2149542AA3059C2258775006312BD?OpenDocument [33] Likumprojekts “Grozījumi Patērētāju tiesību aizsardzības likumā” [Draft Law “Amendments into the Consumer Rights Protection Law”] (Nr.1179/Lp13). Available in Latvian: https://titania.
saeima.lv/LIVS13/saeimalivs13.nsf/0/946D649B5CF1D56CC22587680040405B?OpenDocument.
[34] Law of February 17, 2022, On Amendments to the Consumer Rights Protection Act. Its official translation into English is not available.
[35] Article 27(1) first sentence Consumer Rights Protection Act.
162
[36] Article 16 Amendment Act by supplementing the Consumer Rights Protection Act with a new Article 16.1 and its Para 3.
[37] Article 21 Amendment Act by expressing Article 27(1) first sentence (as well as the whole Article 27) of the Consumer Rights Protection Act in the new wording.
[38] K. TORGĀNS, J. KĀRKLIŅŠ, V. MANTROV, L. RASNAČS, Contract Law in Latvia, AH Alphen aan den Rijn, Wolters Kluwer, 2020, p.208.
[39] Likumprojekts “Grozījumi Patērētāju tiesību aizsardzības likumā” [Draft Law “Amendments into the Consumer Rights Protection Law”] (Nr.1179/Lp13). Available in Latvian: https://titania.
saeima.lv/LIVS13/saeimalivs13.nsf/0/946D649B5CF1D56CC22587680040405B?OpenDocument.
[40] Article 2 Amendment Act by supplementing the Consumer Rights Protection Act with a new Para 6 in Article 2.1.
[41] Article 25 Amendment Act.
[42] Article 33(2) Consumer Rights Protection Act.
[43] Article 33(4) Consumer Rights Protection Act.
[44] Article 33(3) Consumer Rights Protection Act.
163