Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Danish Court Rules Apple Must Replace Man's iPhone With New Rather Than Refurbished Model

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
67,957
38,668



A court in Denmark today ruled Apple must replace a Danish man's iPhone with a new model rather than a refurbished model in accordance with local law.

iPhone-4-cracked.jpg
(Image: The Sydney Morning Herald)​

A trio of judges found Apple was not entitled to replace David Lysgaard's iPhone 4 with a refurbished model since it may contain recycled parts, which could result in a lower resale value and went against his "legitimate expectation" of receiving a brand new iPhone equivalent to his original purchase.

By providing Lysgaard with a refurbished iPhone, rather than an equivalent new model, the court found Apple to have violated the Danish Sale of Goods Act. The judges upheld an earlier decision reached by Denmark's Consumer Complaints Board, which also said the replacement should be a new, not refurbished, model.

Apple disagreed with the Consumer Complaints Board's decision in 2014 and sued Lysgaard, arguing that refurbished iPhones are produced and tested in the same way as new iPhones. Apple also said refurbished iPhones undergo rigorous tests and strict quality control. Apple can now appeal the judgment with a higher court.

Earlier this year, a Dutch court similarly ordered Apple to replace a woman's iPhone 6 Plus with a new model, not a refurbished one.

(Thanks, Boris!)

Article Link: Danish Court Rules Apple Must Replace Man's iPhone With New Rather Than Refurbished Model
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2016/12/09/dutch-new-vs-refurbished-iphone-lawsuit/
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: brdeveloper and JamesPDX
And this is front page news because...?

Denmark's a civil law country so this is no precedent (even if Denmark was a common law country it's an appealable decision, so wouldn't be binding precedent for anything).

Sounds like it's very specific to Denmark's consumer law too (so is unlikely to have any meaning in a global context).

---

Edit for the benefit of those who are unfamiliar with 'civil law' and 'common law' differences (to say that a civil court would give precedential treatment to a judgment... let alone a lower court judgment is such a major error of understanding that I had to point it out):

Civil law, civilian law, or Roman law is a legal system originating in Europe, intellectualized within the framework of late Roman law, and whose most prevalent feature is that its core principles are codified into a referable system which serves as the primary source of law. This can be contrasted with common law systems whose intellectual framework comes from judge-made decisional law which gives precedential authority to prior court decisions on the principle that it is unfair to treat similar facts differently on different occasions (doctrine of judicial precedent, or stare decisis).

https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_law_(legal_system)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TiquanS, adib, Borin and 4 others
Silly. Does the refurbished part pass electrons through it differently than the new part? As somebody who had been in Apple support for years and has replaced hundreds if not thousands of parts and devices, the worst thing that can happen isnt that something is broken within warranty, that is forgivable. Its if its broken more than once. Refurb parts are great. Apple is actually telling the truth here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skoal, TiquanS, Goatllama and 16 others
djgamble said:
And this is front page news because...
Click to expand...

Because it could spill over into the EU and completely undermine Apple's push to replace parts instead of manufacturing new devices en masse, and have huge implications for not only the supply chain as well as their environmental goals? The question I counter with is, why did you have to even ask that question?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skoal, RuralJuror, TiquanS and 29 others
Sucks that this has the potential to set precedence moving forward cause they'll probably have to appeal it and fight it.

Otherwise, just give the guy that dusty old iPhone 4 that fell off of the delivery crate 6 or 7 years ago... ha ha
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrUNIMOG
I could see apple skirting this issue by offering a replacement with a brand new device only if you return everything that came with the original purchase, box, headphones, charging cables, and a new device would take between 2 and 4 weeks. Or you could walk out the door today with a refurb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Agit21, thmshale, MrUNIMOG and 1 other person
A "refurb" is essentially the same as a "repair" that required the replacement of all the phone's components at once (i.e. as if they were all broken), but can happen on the spot, rather than waiting for an engineer to do the "repair".

So that sounds good for the consumer...(fast repair service).

...except...if it were a car that had broken, would you really want your car replaced under warranty using a car built from second hand parts...?
 
  • Like
Reactions: RuralJuror, pratikindia, d0nK and 8 others
djgamble said:
And this is front page news because...?

Denmark's a civil law country so this is no precedent (even if Denmark was a common law country it's an appealable decision, so wouldn't be binding precedent for anything).

Sounds like it's very specific to Denmark's consumer law too (so is unlikely to have any meaning in a global context).
Click to expand...

....because people want to know. Because it is an Apple rumor site.

Also, did you even READ it? You said it is not setting precedent but the article clearly says: "If the ruling is upheld, it could set a major precedent in Denmark that could see Apple forced to replace iPhones with new models rather than refurbished models in the future"

...so either they're wrong or you are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RuralJuror and RowellE
yanksfan114 said:
So if the device is no longer manufactured, does this guy get a new SE or something?
Click to expand...
No theres plenty of stock in most cases. The language of replacement parts is something like "the replacement must meet or exceed specifications of the defective part" which is why sometimes if you had a broken 250gb HDD under warranty you might get a 500gb replacement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrUNIMOG
usersince86 said:
Consumer protection law(s) in Denmark wouldn't apply to other countries, though, correct?
Click to expand...

Exactly, and Denmark is a 'civil law country' so they don't have 'precedents' either. They go straight back to the statute on every matter and (since their system is inquisitorial) the judge will ask questions + ask for evidence they feel is relevant. Civil law courts are in no way bound by previous decisions!

Somebody send this 'journo' to first year law school...
 
I understand the reason for the ruling. But I actually prefer receiving a refurbished phone from Apple as a replacement. It's like the phone I bought except it's been updated with newer replacement parts. Why get a "new" iPhone 4, which at this point would have been sitting around for six years?
 
  • Like
Reactions: doctor-don, ZhenyaF and KdParker
Does this mean he gets a box-fresh iPhone 4 (!) or 'the equivalent'? I have no idea what 'the equivalent' would be now.
 
Spectrum said:
A "refurb" is essentially the same as a "repair" that involved the replacement of all the phone's components (as if they were all broken), but can happen on the spot, rather than waiting for an engineer to do the "repair".

So that sounds good for the consumer...(fast repair service).

...except if it were a car that had broken, would you really want your car replaced under warranty using a car built from second hand parts...?
Click to expand...
Not an accurate comparison. Moving parts are quite different than circuits, chips, and solid state components.

Also, the auto industry has the same rules. If your car needs a part replacement its more than likely the replacement will be a refurb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Agit21, MrUNIMOG, stopthenonsense and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back