But such training does not always go well. And then the question arises: can the buyer of such a course refuse it and demand a refund? The organization that provided the services does not always agree to do so. Such a dispute was examined by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation*. The case was seen by the Pravo.ru portal.
When a businessman receives an education, he does not get any income from this – he acquires knowledge that he will use one day at his own discretion.
The businessman paid 250,000 rubles for the training. But rather he quickly dropped out of the courses. And he was offered to return only 20,000 rubles. The local courts agreed with these calculations. The businessman considered that in this situation his rights as a consumer were violated. The Sun explained how much to return to the buyer.
This story began in Transbaikalia with the fact that one businessman somehow ended up in a local business development center. The company positioned itself as an entrepreneurial educator. They announced the corresponding one-year courses at a cost of 250,000 rubles. Employees of the organization explained to the businessman the conditions of participation in general terms. And they said that he can fully refund the money for the training if he does not give results.
The businessman paid, although he was not presented with a single document for acquaintance with educational services, and he did not sign anything. And he went to work. But they soon disappointed him, and he demanded his money back. In response, I heard that in case of refusal of services, a refund is made in the amount of 8 percent of the contract amount. He was offered to return only 20,000 rubles.
The businessman did not agree with such calculations and sent a claim to the center demanding the return of all the money. The center refused. So the businessman went to trial.
The court agreed with the organization’s calculations and recovered only 20,000 rubles in favor of the plaintiff. The decision stated that the Law “On Protection of Consumer Rights” does not apply in this situation. The appeal upheld this decision.
And the businessman went to the Supreme Court. Where he stated that the part of the contract, which provides for a small return, does not comply with article 32 of the Consumer Rights Protection Law.
A representative of the center attended the hearing in the Supreme Court. He explained that, from his point of view, the rules of the Civil Code on the contract must be applied to the disputed situation. He referred to article 723 of the Civil Code (“Contractor’s liability for inadequate quality of work”), and another representative of the defendant pointed out that the client could only terminate the contract if the service was found to be inadequate. But he did not prove that there were deficiencies in the center’s services.
The president of the Supreme Court pointed out that the plaintiff did not actually speak of defects in the provision of services.
The purpose of the program is to acquire knowledge about the basics of creating and running a business, – explained the representative of the center.
Is the acquisition of knowledge a business activity? – the judge asked the representative of the center. And he remembered that the entrepreneur wins. And when a person receives an education, he has no income from this. He acquires knowledge, which he then disposes of at his discretion.
In its decision, the Supreme Court sided with the businessman. The Judicial College of Civil Cases of the Armed Forces canceled the acts of appeal and cassation, sending the case for a new trial to the Trans-Baikal Regional Court, which will have to determine how much money the center should return to the citizen.
* Determination of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 72-KG23-1-K8
