In 2013, Justin Bieber visited Argentina to give a concert at the River Plate stadium in Buenos Aires. But what was the dream of many fans soon became a disappointment when the artist left the stage a few minutes into the show. The reason? An alleged intoxication. In Cipolletti a fan filed a lawsuit against the company that sold her the tickets requesting the money back.
The teenager acquired the tickets on a digital platform from his home in Cipolletti, under this argument the Court of Appeals confirmed that the lawsuit continues in Río Negro. The sanctioned companies alleged that the venue of the concert was in Buenos Aires.
According to the ruling, the fan of the Canadian singer will be “financially compensated due to the singer’s failed concert at the River Plate stadium in Buenos Aires.” In that presentation, Justin Bieber could not finish his performance due to physical discomfort forty minutes after it began. This also implied the cancellation of the following shows.
The night before, Bieber had been involved in an altercation at a nightclub in Palermo. Although the singer “presented a medical certificate that justified his intoxication,” the first instance ruling held the event organizer and the company selling the tickets responsible.
Five years later, the young woman filed a civil lawsuit due to frustration caused by the event. The lawsuit faced several obstacles, including a change of lawyers and distance from the defendant companies, which are located in Buenos Aires.
The companies Feg Entretenimientos SA, organizer of the event, and Mibles SA, seller of the tickets, never offered a refund.. The firms argued that the concert took place and that other artists participated, although the main star was Justin Bieber.
The failure, finally, forced the companies to compensate the young woman, covering the cost of tickets, flights and 50% of the accommodation, in addition to compensation for the moral damage caused.
The ruling highlighted that “Bieber’s poor performance of the concert constitutes a breach of the offer to the consumer, and that cancellation due to the artist’s health problems is not an unforeseeable or inevitable event.” In that case a rescheduling or refund should have been offered.
This ruling was appealed by the company and the proceedings were reviewed by the Cipolletti Court of Civil Appeals.. At that time, the victim argued that when she bought the tickets through the “Topshow” page she did so from her house, in said town.
The defendant firms presented an exception of incompetence, alleging that the place of performance of the concert and their domicile were in Buenos Aires, not in Río Negro. This objection was rejected in the first instance. At that time it was considered that “since it was a consumer relationship, territorial jurisdiction could be in the consumer’s domicile.”
Again the firms appealed this decision but the Civil Chamber confirmed the ruling. The court concluded that the defense of incompetence was not valid, given that the consumer contract and the legal relationship had been established through a digital platform from the young woman’s home.
