For download as PDF-File in english (1,0 MB) - VBH

EVERYTHING SIMPLE
Interview with an Expert
Prof. Niemöller About the Mandatory CE Labelling and
Possible Consequences
An incorrect CE labelling bears risks not
only for large-scale windows manufacturers.
Prof. Christian Niemöller is a specialist
solicitor for building law and managing
director of the law office SMNG
Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH, seated
in Frankfurt am Main and specialised in
building law questions. In the interview
he gives some specific examples of possible
impacts.
Prof. Niemöller, which consequences do
manufacturers face, who do not mark
products which are subject to the CE labelling?
Concerning the public law (building law,
federal state building order) authorities
may enact a decree against manufacturers,
especially by means of a cease and
desist order. The infringement against
the mandatory CE labelling may be an
administrative offence and may be fined
respectively.
Concerning civil law it still is a question if
a missing or incorrect label is an infringement
of a contract. In this respect customers
as well as buyers may claim for
compensation.
What do you think are the most frequent
mistakes?
The most frequent mistake is to disregard
the guidelines for the CE label like
the information it must contain, where to
affix the label and how it has to look in
detail, e.g. the manufacturer uses the CE
marking as an advertising and marketing
tool and slightly deviates from the correct
guidelines for the CE marking. Of course
manufacturers are allowed to affix further
data (e.g. quality marks) anywhere on the
product; but that shouldn’t affect the visibility
and readability of the CE label and it
shouldn’t lead to any misunderstandings
concerning the CE label.
What about medium-sized and small
businesses – are there presently any
risks for them?
Of course there are. There are no exceptions
from the mandatory CE marking for
medium-sized and small enterprises. The
risks are the same.
Prof. Christian Niemöller
Meanwhile there are some cases of dispute
in the branch. May you give an example?
In one of our law suits a customer refused
to pay an outstanding amount, mainly
because the components the supplier
used were not marked with the CE label,
although they were subject to the CE labelling.
In court he states that he, due to
the missing CE marking, was not obliged
to settle the outstanding payment. Finally
the dispute could have been solved by an
amicable settlement – however not without
concessions.
Formally and only with a proper CE marking
a manufacturer proves the compliance
with the labelling obligation and may
avert any claims for compensation.
Is the implementation of the mandatory CE
marking comparable to the RAL initiation
20 years ago? Several manufactures are
still connecting bad memories with RAL.
RAL provides quality labels. The CE label
is mark of conformity. But in those days
the problems were the same - customers
refused payment because the installation
was not according to RAL specifications.
Today customers again may refuse payment
for the reason that a product is not
marked precisely. So my recommendation
is to strictly follow the guidelines for
the CE marking.
12 VBH Magazin 03/2010