Civil Liability of Telecommunications Providers for the Forfeiture of Unused Data Quota Based on Validity Period Clauses

The widespread reliance on cellular internet services has increased the legal complexities governing the contractual relationship between telecommunications providers and consumers, notably regarding the automatic forfeiture of unused data quota upon the expiration of package validity periods. This study examines the legal validity of active-period clauses and analyzes providers' civil liability under contract and consumer protection law. Employing a normative legal research method with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, this study reveals that while active-period clauses can legally define service duration, they do not automatically justify the unilateral forfeiture of unconsumed quota. In accordance with Constitutional Court Decision Number 273/PUU-XXIII/2025, telecommunications operators are obligated to provide rollover or continuity mechanisms to keep purchased quota accessible. Civil liability arises when provider fault or negligence deprives consumers of their purchased quota rights. Regarding evidentiary standards, consumers are relieved from proving complex internal technical mechanisms under the operator’s control; under a proportional reversed burden of proof, consumers need only establish the contractual relation, their injury, and a causal link, while the provider must disprove fault or technical negligence. Equitable redress encompasses quota restoration, validity period extensions, equivalent services, or monetary compensation, with the Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency (BPSK) serving as an effective out-of-court dispute forum for small-value claims.