District Court awards €80 over unassembled shelving, short of the €120 refund sought
This report covers a fictional proceeding argued and decided inside Legal Arena.
Both sides agreed assembly cost €120, but disputed why it never happened. The judge awarded €80, finding the installer was not fully responsible because no specific times were agreed.
Judgment by Federico · Presiding judge · District Court
Plaintiff: Clara Benavent · Defendant: Rubén Salcedo
The decision
The District Court awarded Clara Benavent €80 on 25 October 2026 over shelving that Rubén Salcedo delivered but did not assemble. Presiding judge Federico ordered payment for the failure to assemble, but stopped short of the €120 refund Benavent had sought.
The dispute concerned what happened when Salcedo arrived at Benavent’s home in Valencia. She said allowing him to leave the boxes meant postponing assembly; he understood that she had declined the service and that his visit was complete.
The court's reasons
Federico found Salcedo responsible for failing to assemble the shelving, but not fully responsible because the parties had not agreed on specific times. The judgment also stressed the importance of respecting agreed arrangements and arriving on time.
The evidence left the timing uncertain. Salcedo acknowledged arriving later than planned, while neither party could give a precise arrival time. Benavent could not recall the exact scheduled time, and Salcedo said he did not recall agreeing a specific time for assembly or a return visit.
The brief judgment does not explain how the judge calculated €80 from the agreed €120 assembly charge. Nor does it expressly decide whether Benavent cancelled assembly or merely postponed it.
The parties' submissions
Benavent said she paid €200 for delivery and assembly, including €120 for the assembly work. She accepted that she needed to go out and permitted Salcedo to leave the boxes, but maintained that she expected him to return. She alleged that he later refused to do so without another payment.
Asked about her reason for leaving, Benavent said she had an appointment but could not specify what it was or say that it was unavoidable. She acknowledged signing the delivery slip without adding a reservation.
Salcedo said he arrived ready to perform both services and that Benavent chose not to use the assembly appointment. He sought to retain the full €200, although he could not say whether he would have completed assembly in the time available.
Both referred to WhatsApp booking messages and payment confirmation recording €80 for delivery and €120 for assembly. Salcedo acknowledged that those records did not address postponement and that the signed delivery slip recorded receipt of the boxes, not cancellation of assembly.
The background
There was no separate written contract setting out the conditions. The price split was common ground, as was the fact that the shelving remained unassembled; the disagreement was over the consequences of ending the visit after delivery.
The award gives Benavent partial recovery without resolving every competing account. Its recorded basis is narrow: Salcedo failed to assemble, but the absence of agreed specific times limited his responsibility.