Luxembourg City court rejects €300 refund claim over disputed café menu delivery

The Justice of the Peace in Luxembourg City denied Claire Hoffmann’s claim for repayment of €300 she paid Tom Weber for café menu cards. The court awarded her nothing and ordered neither party to pay the other under the claim.

Hoffmann said she never received the cards. Weber said he left a box with someone behind the café counter, but could not identify the recipient. The court did not decide that the cards had been delivered; it found that Hoffmann had not proved a right to repayment.

The judge found that the parties’ accounts supported the €300 payment for the menu-card order. But payment alone did not establish that the price had to be returned, and the bank record itself was not presented for inspection.

Weber’s message reporting a café drop-off was evidence that he had sent that report, and it gave some support to his account. It was not a signed receipt, did not identify a recipient and did not prove what was in the box. Repeated exhibit entries referred to the same message, not independent corroboration.

Hoffmann’s side said camera footage did not show Weber, but the footage was not presented. The court could not assess its timing, coverage or reliability. A claimed inconsistency about a waiter or witness was also unsupported by testimony or a record establishing what had been said.

With delivery unresolved, Hoffmann had not proved non-delivery or another specific loss. The court also lacked reliable records defining the order’s terms and found no basis to calculate a partial refund. Weber’s lack of further records did not shift the burden of proving the claim to him.

Hoffmann’s side sought the full €300, pointing to the payment and questioning Weber’s delivery account. It referred to a bank transaction marked for menu cards and to camera footage, although neither was presented.

Weber asked the court to deny or reduce the claim. He said he handed a box to someone behind the counter and sent a message that afternoon reporting the drop-off, while acknowledging that he had no receipt or record naming the person or independently confirming the contents.

Hoffmann paid Weber to print menu cards for her Luxembourg City café. Weber proposed an afternoon for delivery, when Hoffmann was away, and she later asked for her money back.

The decision leaves open whether the cards reached the café or Hoffmann. It establishes only that, on the available record, she did not prove a basis or amount for repayment.