EAE-Ostelea, the parent company of EAE Business School, has been ordered to refund a student for a training course he was unable to complete due to an aggravation of Crohn’s disease. This decision is significant for chronically ill individuals who may struggle with fulfilling contracts due to unforeseen health complications.
In this case, the private teaching company argued that the student’s pre-existing condition did not prevent him from taking the course and demanded payment of the outstanding fees. However, the student’s health deteriorated unexpectedly, leading to the termination of the contract. After a legal battle, the court ruled in favor of the student and ordered a refund of all amounts paid.
The magistrate criticized EAE Business School for not providing medical evidence to support their claims that the student could have continued the course despite his illness. The court based its decision on the clause as things stand doctrine, which aims to rebalance contracts in cases of unforeseen changes that create disproportionate disadvantages to one party.
The ruling emphasizes the importance of good faith and absence of fault in such situations. It concludes that the student’s inability to complete the course despite payment created a significant imbalance in the benefits agreed upon, warranting a refund of all amounts paid. This case highlights the need for fair treatment of individuals facing unforeseen health challenges in contractual agreements.
This ruling is especially important for chronically ill individuals who may struggle with fulfilling contracts due to unforeseen health complications. It shows that companies must be willing to work with students who are experiencing health issues and provide accommodations when necessary.
It also highlights how important it is for companies to provide medical evidence when making claims about an individual’s ability to complete a contract or course. Without this evidence, it can be difficult for courts to make informed decisions about whether or not a refund is necessary.
Overall, this ruling underscores how important it is for companies and individuals alike to prioritize fairness and flexibility when dealing with unforeseen circumstances such as health issues in contractual agreements.
