Liability of Car Trading Company Website for the Sale of a "Cloned" Automobile

Recently, the National Court of Appeals in Commercial Matters (the “Court of Appeals”) analyzed the liability of the “www.demotores.com” website, for the publication of an advertisement made by a user that resulted in the sale of a stolen car (National Court of Appeals in Commercial Matters, Division B, “Gómez, Maciel Francisco José v. Dridco S.A”, March 7, 2017).

The facts of the case are as follows: Mr. Gómez Maciel saw an advertisement on DeMotores for the sale of a car. He contacted the seller and bought it. When he tried to register the transfer, he realized that the car was a stolen vehicle and that its documentation was falsified. Mr. Gómez Maciel sued Dridco S.A. – which operates DeMotores – claiming that it too was responsible for the damages suffered. The court of first instance rejected the claim.

The plaintiff appealed and held that Dridco S.A. formed part of the supply chain and that it should be held to a strict liability standard based on the provisions of Section 40 of Consumer Protection Law No. 24,240.

The Court of Appeals upheld the ruling of the court of first instance. In this respect, it held that the activity of Dridco S.A. was limited to providing a service (allowing the publication of an advertisement and forwarding the seller’s contact information) and that it did not participate in the sale itself. Consequently, it did not act as intermediary and was not part of the consumer relationship. 

In particular, the court emphasized that Dridco S.A. did not profit from the sale itself. It held that this element differentiated this case from “Claps, Enrique Martín v. Mercado Libre S.A.” (National Court of Appeals in Civil Matters, Division K, “Claps, Enrique Martín v. Mercado Libre S.A.”, October 5, 2012), in which Mercado Libre was held liable for the sale of stolen concert tickets, since in that case Mercado Libre charged a commission on the sale price.

This decision was rendered within a context of ongoing discussions on the liability of Internet service providers. Despite the existence of legislative initiatives (see "Law addressing ISPs’ Liability: Preliminary Senate Approval"), Argentina does not have any specific regulation on this issue. In this context, the precedent set by the Argentine Supreme Court in “Rodríguez, María Belén v. Google” (see "Fault- Based Liability Standard for Search Engines’ Policies") was of great importance and the Court of Appeals refers to this case in its ruling.