1.

Do Article 23 of Directive [2008/48] (1) and the principle of its effectiveness preclude an interpretation and application of national law – Article 509 of the Civil Code (Civil Code of 23 April 1964, Dziennik Ustaw (Journal of Laws), No 16, item 93, as subsequently amended; ‘the CC’), according to which the transfer of a consumer-borrower’s claim, derived from rights under Article 45(1) of the Law on Consumer Credit (Ustawa o kredycie konsumenckim z dnia 12 maja 2011 r (Law on Consumer Credit of 12 May 2011), Dziennik Ustaw, No 126, item 715, as subsequently amended; ‘Law on Consumer Credit’) –, that is to say a national law sanction introduced pursuant to Article 23 of Directive [2008/48], on a seller or supplier, for the purpose of its pursuit by the seller or supplier, is contrary to a characteristic of the consumer obligation and therefore ineffective as it makes it excessively difficult for the consumer-borrower to exercise the rights provided for in Directive [2008/48]?

2.

Do Article 23 of Directive [2008/48] and the principle of its effectiveness preclude an interpretation and application of national law – Article 5 of the Civil Code–, according to which a national court would be prohibited from granting judicial protection to a seller or supplier who, by way of transfer, acquired the claims of a consumer-borrower derived from the application of Article 45(1) of the Civil Code (a sanction based on Article 23 of Directive [2008/48]) and pursues those claims against the defendant creditor, as it makes it excessively difficult for the consumer-borrower to exercise the rights provided for in Directive [2008/48]?

3.

Do Article 23 of Directive [2008/48] and the principle of its effectiveness preclude an interpretation and application of national law – Article 45(5) of the Law on Consumer Credit –, according to which the time of performance of a consumer credit agreement is deemed to be the time at which the amount of the loan is disbursed, and, consequently, that the right to pursue sanctions under Article 45(1) of the Law on Consumer Credit (the only sanction provided for in Polish law for infringement of the provisions of national law implementing Directive [2008/48]) expires one year after disbursement of the loan, as it makes it excessively difficult for the consumer-borrower to exercise the rights provided for in Directive [2008/48]?

4.

Are Article 3(g) and (i) and Article 10(2)(g) of Directive [2008/48] to be interpreted, in the light of the judgment in Case C 714/22, S.R.G. v Profi Credit Bulgaria EOOD, as meaning that, where a creditor, in addition to making funds available to a consumer-borrower as part of the loan principal, which the consumer-borrower may freely dispose of, also makes available to the consumer-borrower funds intended to cover non-interest credit costs (for example commission), the interest charged on the funds made available to cover non-interest credit costs should also be included in the total cost of the credit and, therefore, also be taken into account in the calculation of the APRC? Are the total cost of the credit and APRC thus calculated (also taking into account interest on funds made available to the borrower to cover non-interest credit costs) calculated correctly?

5.

If the answer to the previous question is in the negative, will including interest on the amount made available to the borrower to cover non-interest credit costs in the total cost of the loan (and consequently also in the APRC calculation) result in an overstatement of the total cost of the loan and, consequently, also an overstatement of the APRC presented to the consumer? Does such an incorrect – overstated [–] calculation of the total cost of credit and the APRC and the presentation of incorrectly calculated – overstated [–] value to the consumer cause harm to the consumer? Does the incorrect calculation and presentation to the consumer of overstated values of the total cost of credit and APRC justify the application of sanctions under Article 45(1) of the Law on Consumer Credit? Would the sanction provided for in Article 45(1) of the Law on Consumer Credit (free credit sanction – repayment by the consumer-borrower to the creditor of only the loan principal without interest and costs) in such a case be compatible with Article 23 of Directive [2008/48], and in particular with the requirement relating to the proportionality of penalties?