How a neutrally labeled order button can lead to the reversal of your online purchase according to § 312j BGB.
Did you purchase your Tesla entirely online, but the order button was labeled neutrally? If so, a legally binding contract may already be invalid. According to the so-called "button solution," incorrect labeling means no contract is formed, allowing for a refund or cancellation. This article explains what's important.
The button solution: what § 312j BGB requires
Consumers who order something online that requires payment should be clearly aware that they are thereby committing to a payment. This is the purpose of the so-called "button solution" in Section 312j of the German Civil Code (BGB). It applies to consumer contracts for payment in electronic commerce, i.e., wherever an order is initiated via a button.
According to Section 312j Paragraph 3 of the German Civil Code (BGB), this button must be clearly legible and labeled with nothing other than the words "order with obligation to pay" or a similarly unambiguous phrase. A neutral label such as "Order," "Send," or "Submit" is not sufficient.
The legal consequence is set out in Section 312j Paragraph 4 of the German Civil Code (BGB) and is strict: If the entrepreneur fails to fulfill this obligation, the contract is not validly concluded. This is not a matter of contestability or a right of withdrawal, but rather the final invalidity of the contract.
Did you order your Tesla online and are unsure how the button was labeled? Have the order process checked.
The landmark ruling of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) of October 9, 2025
For a long time, the button solution was treated in practice as a mere formality that could be interpreted liberally or rectified retroactively. That is no longer the case. With its ruling of October 9, 2025 (Case No. I ZR 159/24), the Federal Court of Justice took the provision seriously and confirmed it as a genuine requirement for validity.
The case in question involved a brokerage agreement concluded online. The order button was labeled simply "Submit." The Federal Court of Justice clarified that this did not create a legally valid contract. The consequence is its final invalidity, which cannot be remedied by subsequent conduct. The court based its decision on the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice regarding consumer protection.
Even though the case involved a brokerage contract, the decision is considered a landmark ruling for all online ordering processes. This is because Section 312j of the German Civil Code (BGB) does not differentiate between sectors, but covers every consumer contract for consideration in electronic commerce.
Whether the principles established by the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) apply to your purchase depends on the specific ordering process. We will review this for you.
Transfer to Tesla: the decision of the Berlin Court of Appeal
That these principles can also apply to car purchases is demonstrated by a ruling of the Berlin Court of Appeal (case no. 24 U 34/25). It concerned a Tesla vehicle purchase that was handled entirely online.
The purchase was initiated via a button that, in the court's assessment, did not meet the requirements of Section 312j Paragraph 3 of the German Civil Code (BGB). It was merely labeled "Order" and lacked the required notification of the payment obligation. This brings Tesla's purely online sales model into focus, where purchases are typically completed solely through the website, bypassing dealerships.
In such a situation, a neutrally labeled order button can lead to the conclusion that no legally binding purchase agreement exists, thus making a refund possible. It should be noted that this is a single, as yet unpublished ruling, and each order process must be assessed individually.
Was your Tesla ordered via a neutrally labeled button? We are checking whether the ruling of the Berlin Court of Appeal applies to your case.
What the reversal means for you
If the contract was not validly concluded after the button solution, the legal basis for the purchase is lacking. You can then demand a refund of the purchase price and return the vehicle in return. The settlement is handled according to the law of unjust enrichment.
A key difference from a material defect: it doesn't matter whether the vehicle itself is defective. Even a technically flawless Tesla can be affected if only the labeling on the order button didn't comply with the specifications.
That the reversal of a Tesla purchase made online can be successful in practice is also demonstrated by a case decided by the Higher Regional Court of Stuttgart, in which a Tesla purchased online successfully returned Whether and to what extent you must accept a usage fee for kilometers driven is not uniformly clarified in the context of rescission under the law of unjust enrichment and should be examined on a case-by-case basis.
A technically sound vehicle does not preclude a return. We will check whether the ordering process allows you this option.
Distinction between revocation and material defect
The button solution is just one of several ways to get out of a Tesla purchased online. Depending on the situation, different approaches are possible, and these can also be combined.
- Button solution: The contract is invalid from the outset due to a faulty order button. The existence of a defect is irrelevant.
- Cancellation: Online purchases generally come with a right of withdrawal. If the withdrawal instructions are incorrect, the withdrawal period can be significantly extended.
- Material defect: If the vehicle does not achieve the advertised range, the statutory warranty rights such as cancellation or price reduction apply.
The Higher Regional Court of Stuttgart has confirmed the right of withdrawal for online orders of a Tesla, as we will report. reported in a separate article. For details regarding rights in cases of insufficient reach, please see our page on [topic missing]. Reversal of an electric car purchase due to insufficient range.
The most promising approach in your case can only be determined after an examination. We will select the most promising strategy for you.
Deadlines and what you should do now
Even if the contract is invalid, you shouldn't wait too long. The right to a refund of the purchase price is subject to the regular three-year statute of limitations. This period begins at the end of the year in which the claim arose and you became aware of the relevant circumstances.
Therefore, save the documentation relating to the order process while it is still available.
- Ordering process: Screenshots or printouts of the order page and the button label are particularly valuable.
- Contract documents: Keep your order confirmation, purchase agreement, and all communication.
- Proof of payment: Keep a record of when and how much you paid the purchase price.
Rogert & Ulbrich are familiar with the implementation of such mass phenomena. The mechanics of tens of thousands of processes of emissions scandal This can be applied to faulty online ordering processes where many purchase contracts have the same error.
Do not delete any documents related to the order process and do not accept any settlement offer before your case has been reviewed.
The sooner your order is reviewed, the more options you have. Secure your rights while the deadlines are still open.
Rogert & Ulbrich – Your lawyers specializing in electric vehicle defect law
Rogert & Ulbrich represents consumers nationwide in vehicle and contract law and has its own Automotive sector as well as a bundled page on Tesla defects. The law firm of Dr. Marco Rogert and Tobias Ulbrich has taken on over 40,000 mandates and filed more than 25,000 lawsuits in the emissions scandal.
We will review your order, determine whether the button solution, a cancellation, or a material defect applies, and enforce your right to a refund. We will negotiate with the manufacturer out of court, and if necessary, pursue your rights in court.
Do you want to reverse the sale of your Tesla purchased online? Get in touch and secure your rights.
