sec_9__para__8

The Court’s judgment in case C-332/17 Starman (154) dealt with the situation where the trader makes available to its consumers, for the purposes covered by Article 21, both a number charged at basic rate and a speed dial number charged at a rate higher than the basic rate when calling from mobile phones. The Court held that, also in such a situation, Article 21 precludes a trader from charging a consumer a higher rate than the basic date. This applies irrespective of whether the trader has informed the consumer in a comprehensible and easily accessible manner of the existence of an alternative telephone number charged at the basic rate and the consumer has nevertheless voluntarily chosen to use another number for the purposes of Article 21:

← sec_9__para__7 · All articles · sec_9__para__9 →

Source: EUR-Lex (Cellar) · retrieved 2026-09-25 · Text as adopted (Official Journal); later amendments are not incorporated in this text.