This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62019CB0364
Case C-364/19: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 April 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Galați — Romania) — XU, YV, ZW, AU, BZ, CA, DB, EC, NL v SC Credit Europe Ipotecar IFN SA, Credit Europe Bank NV (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Consumer protection — Unfair terms — Directive 93/13/EEC — Article 1(2) — Exclusion from the scope of that directive of contractual terms which reflect mandatory provisions of national law — Article 4(2) — Exception to the assessment of whether a term is unfair — Credit agreement denominated in a foreign currency — Alleged infringement of the obligation of information borne by a seller or supplier — Examination to be carried out by the national court as a matter of priority in the light of Article 1(2))
Case C-364/19: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 April 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Galați — Romania) — XU, YV, ZW, AU, BZ, CA, DB, EC, NL v SC Credit Europe Ipotecar IFN SA, Credit Europe Bank NV (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Consumer protection — Unfair terms — Directive 93/13/EEC — Article 1(2) — Exclusion from the scope of that directive of contractual terms which reflect mandatory provisions of national law — Article 4(2) — Exception to the assessment of whether a term is unfair — Credit agreement denominated in a foreign currency — Alleged infringement of the obligation of information borne by a seller or supplier — Examination to be carried out by the national court as a matter of priority in the light of Article 1(2))
Case C-364/19: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 April 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Galați — Romania) — XU, YV, ZW, AU, BZ, CA, DB, EC, NL v SC Credit Europe Ipotecar IFN SA, Credit Europe Bank NV (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Consumer protection — Unfair terms — Directive 93/13/EEC — Article 1(2) — Exclusion from the scope of that directive of contractual terms which reflect mandatory provisions of national law — Article 4(2) — Exception to the assessment of whether a term is unfair — Credit agreement denominated in a foreign currency — Alleged infringement of the obligation of information borne by a seller or supplier — Examination to be carried out by the national court as a matter of priority in the light of Article 1(2))
OJ C 289, 19.7.2021, p. 17–17
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
19.7.2021 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 289/17 |
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 14 April 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Galați — Romania) — XU, YV, ZW, AU, BZ, CA, DB, EC, NL v SC Credit Europe Ipotecar IFN SA, Credit Europe Bank NV
(Case C-364/19) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Consumer protection - Unfair terms - Directive 93/13/EEC - Article 1(2) - Exclusion from the scope of that directive of contractual terms which reflect mandatory provisions of national law - Article 4(2) - Exception to the assessment of whether a term is unfair - Credit agreement denominated in a foreign currency - Alleged infringement of the obligation of information borne by a seller or supplier - Examination to be carried out by the national court as a matter of priority in the light of Article 1(2))
(2021/C 289/23)
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Tribunalul Galați
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: XU, YV, ZW, AU, BZ, CA, DB, EC, NL
Defendants: SC Credit Europe Ipotecar IFN SA, Credit Europe Bank NV
Operative part of the order
Article 1(2) and Article 4(2) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as meaning that, where a court of a Member State is hearing a dispute relating to an allegedly unfair contractual term which reflects a provision of national law which is supplementary in nature, it is required to examine, as a matter of priority, the effect of the exclusion from the scope of that directive laid down in Article 1(2) thereof, and not the effect of the exception to the assessment of whether contractual terms are unfair provided for in Article 4(2) of that directive.