Section 63: Contract terms which may or must be regarded as unfair
302.This section introduces Schedule 2, which lists examples of terms which may be regarded as unfair (this list is known as the “grey list”). Schedule 2 is an indicative and non-exhaustive list. The terms on the list are not automatically unfair, but may be used to assist a court when considering the application of the fairness test in section 62 to a particular case. Equally, terms not found on the list in the Schedule may be found by a court to be unfair by application of the fairness test. This section and the Schedule are based on a copy-out of Article 3(3) of, and the Annex to, the UTCCD. Part 2 of the Schedule explains the scope of the list such that terms in Part 2 are not considered as part of the Schedule but are still assessable for fairness unless section 64 or section 73 applies. Part 2 of the “grey list” accounts, for example, for the specific nature of financial services contracts where fluctuations in the market may influence the price.
303.Terms on the “grey list” are assessable for fairness even if they would otherwise qualify for an exemption under section 64. Terms on the “grey list” are assessable even if they are “transparent” and “prominent” as defined in section 64.
304.For example, if a contract to subscribe to a magazine included a term which provided that the publisher, but not the subscriber, could cancel the delivery at short notice, that term may be regarded as unfair, as it is covered by paragraph 7 of the Schedule (which gives a term which authorises “the trader to dissolve the contact on a discretionary basis where the same facility is not granted to the consumer” as an example of a term which may be unfair). This does not mean that the term is automatically unfair, but the court must take this into account when assessing the term under the fairness test in section 62.
305.This reflects the case law of the EU Court of Justice on the effect of the list of terms in the Annex to the UTCCD. In Case C-478/99 Commission v Sweden (2002) ECR I-4147, the Court stated:
“It is not disputed that a term appearing in the list need not necessarily be considered unfair and, conversely, a term that does not appear in the list may none the less be regarded as unfair... In so far as it does not limit the discretion of the national authorities to determine the unfairness of a term, the list contained in the annex to the Directive does not seek to give consumers rights going beyond those that result from Articles 3 to 7 of the Directive... Inasmuch as the list contained in the annex to the Directive is of indicative and illustrative value, it constitutes a source of information both for the national authorities responsible for applying the implementing measures and for individuals affected by those measures.”
(paras.20-22)
306.In Case C-472/10 Nemzeti (judgment of 26 April 2012) the Court emphasised the importance of the list:
“If the content of the annex does not suffice in itself to establish automatically the unfair nature of a contested term, it is nevertheless an essential element on which the competent court may base its assessment as to the unfair nature of that term.”
(para.26)
307.Part 1 of Schedule 2 is as included in the UTCCRs and in the UTCCD, however the terminology has been brought in-line with the Act as a whole. In addition, three additional items have been added to the list (paragraphs 5, 12 and 14) as recommended by the Law Commissions in their report of March 2013(34).
308.Paragraph 5 adds to the grey list terms of a contract which have the object or effect of requiring that a consumer pay a disproportionate amount if they decide not to continue the contract. In this paragraph the phrase “decides not to conclude or perform” includes where a consumer cancels a contract (and is charged a so-called “termination fee”).
309.Paragraph 12 adds to the grey list terms which have the object or effect of allowing the trader to determine the subject matter of the contract after the contract has been agreed with the consumer. In certain circumstances, defined in paragraph 23, this does not apply to contracts which last indefinitely.
310.Paragraph 14 adds to the grey list terms which have the object or effect of allowing the trader to set (for the first time) the price under a contract (or the method for calculating the price), after that contract has been agreed with the consumer. The paragraph expressly provides that, in certain circumstances, defined in paragraphs 23, 24, and 25, it does not apply to contracts which last indefinitely, contracts for the sale of securities and foreign currency (etc), and price index clauses. This is only for the avoidance of doubt, because in most of these situations the price of the contract, or the method for calculating it, will be determined before the contract is agreed, so paragraph 14 would not be relevant.
311.This section also implements Article 15 of the Distance Marketing Directive (Directive 2002/65/EC concerning the distance marketing of consumer financial services, implemented in the UK in the Financial Services (Distance Marketing) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/2095)). That Directive sets common minimum standards for the information that must be given to a consumer prior to a distance contract for financial services being concluded. There are also provisions for rights of withdrawal (‘cancellation rights’) in many circumstances, and provisions to protect consumers in relation to misuse of payment cards in connection with distance contracts for financial services, unsolicited supplies of financial services and unsolicited communications about such services. Article 15 provides that any contractual term or condition that puts the burden of proof on the consumer (rather than the trader) to show non-compliance with the Directive is an unfair term.
