[automatically translated] The essay offers a critical review of the content of Directive 2011/83 / EU, also in relation to the objectives announced in the proposal (and then abandoned), focusing particularly on the rules regarding information requirements to consumatore.Alla light of these rules, new Directive is revealed as a significant further confirmation of the choice that entrusts the objective of the contractual transparency a tight form and content of information requirements, along a process which here is called a "standardization" of the conduct of the professional. The purpose of disclosure is not given to techniques of control and verification of the concrete level of information offered to the contractor "weak", but rather to predetermined standards of transparency considered "tolerable" by professionals and for this imposed in a generalized way. The information requirements, now extended to contracts "different" from those at a distance or away from business premises, see accentuate their "polymorphism", appearing only in some cases in as "strong" information whose contents are already an integral part the contract. Nevertheless, in the wake of the above, the Directive does not resolve the issue, Central, remedies to the violation of information requirements, delegating it once again to Member States' choices. The significance of the persistent "neutrality" of the Community legislature on the point is here investigated in the light of the ongoing review of ' Community acquis in particular with regard to the choices emerged in the Draft Common Frame of Reference and in the Proposal for a Regulation of the sale ccmune law, both significant in the sense of restoring the regime of information requirements on the ground, traditional, pre-contractual liability, leaving on background, unresolved, the question posed by the apparent closeness of breach of information obligations and cases of "defect of consent", well signposted from the best European doctrine. The return reassuring all'alveo of pre-contractual liability is fulfilled at the cost - highlights the wise - to open the way for a strong reduction of the "specialty" of the right of consumer contracts, of which the author identifies as a significant index l ' extension of the rule of liability for all information obligations even in contracts between professionals (art.29 common law of sale). Critical reflection allows you to envisage the conclusion that the Directive marks the highest level (though disappointing) a "" protection law presumably is going to lose its specialties and with it his "intensity."
|Title of host publication||Persona e diritto|
|Number of pages||60|
|Publication status||Published - 2013|
|Name||Collana della Facoltà di Giurisprudenza dell'Università di Palermo|