Netflix, unlawful price increases. Consumers: 'Refunds up to 500 euros'. The company: we will appeal
The clauses allowing changes in the price of subscriptions, in violation of the Consumer Code, allowed changes without stating a justified reason in the contract
by Andrea Biondi and Sara Monaci
"The Court of Rome upheld the action brought by Movimento Consumatori against Netflix Italia, ascertaining the vexatiousness - and therefore the nullity - of the clauses that allowed the modification of the price of subscriptions and other contractual conditions from 2017 to January 2024".
Thus a note from the consumers' association giving news of sentence 4993/2026 of the Court of Rome, sixteenth civil section, published on 1 April, against which Netflix has already announced an appeal which, it is entirely predictable, will be presented with a request for suspension. "We will file an appeal against the decision. At Netflix, our subscribers come first. We take consumer rights very seriously and believe that our conditions have always been in line with Italian law and practice,' says a company spokesperson.
In essence, the court ruled that the clauses that from 2017 to January 2024 allowed Netflix to change prices and conditions without stating a justified reason in the contract were null and void. Hence the heaviest consequence: the increases applied in 2017, 2019, 2021 and in November 2024 to contracts signed between 2017 and January 2024 are considered unlawful and liable to be returned.
The heart of the ruling lies in the ius variandi, i.e. the power to unilaterally modify the contract. For the court, it is not enough to notify the customer 30 days in advance and grant him or her the right of withdrawal: the consumer must know from the outset what the reasons are that, in the future, might justify an economic squeeze or a revision of the conditions. In the versions of the contract in force until January 2024, writes the college, this framework was missing; and clause 6.5, which remained in force from January 2024 to April 2025, was also held to be unlawful insofar as it continued to allow changes without sufficient predetermination of the reasons.
The court recognises, however, that the changes introduced by Netflix in April 2025 on the terms of use clause are, in the new wording, compliant with the Consumer Code, because they are finally anchored to specific causes such as changes in the service, regulatory obligations, clarity of clauses, technological or security requirements. In essence, the judges distinguish between the old contractual framework, which was rejected, and the newer one, which passes the test.
