1.

Must Articles 3, 6 and 7 of Directive 93/13/EEC (2) be interpreted as meaning that they preclude a national provision such as Article 695(1)(4) of the LEC (3), as it is interpreted by the Provincial Courts, which prevents the assessment of the unfairness of terms that have not been applied by the creditor when calculating the debt that it is claiming, but which were applied previously, and that assessment could make it possible to offset the amounts that were unduly paid?

2.

If it is possible to review the unfairness of those terms, must Articles 6 and 7 of Directive 93/13/EEC and the principle of effectiveness be interpreted as meaning that they preclude a national provision such as Article 695(2) of the LEC, which prevents consumers from submitting documentation after filing their opposition to enforcement, does not provide that the court may, of its own motion, obtain evidence in that regard and prevents the amount from being determined subsequent to the decision bringing an end to the opposition to the enforcement proceedings?