Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62012CN0123

Case C-123/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Giurgiu (Romania) lodged on 6 March 2012 — SC Volksbank România S.A. v Comisariatul Județean pentru Protecția Consumatorilor Giurgiu

OJ C 151, 26.5.2012, p. 19–19 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

26.5.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 151/19


Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Giurgiu (Romania) lodged on 6 March 2012 — SC Volksbank România S.A. v Comisariatul Județean pentru Protecția Consumatorilor Giurgiu

(Case C-123/12)

2012/C 151/33

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Giurgiu

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: SC Volksbank România S.A.

Defendant: Comisariatul Județean pentru Protecția Consumatorilor Giurgiu

Questions referred

1.

Can Article 4(2) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC (1) be interpreted as meaning that ‘main subject matter of the contract’ and ‘price’, as referred to in that provision, cover the elements which make up the consideration to which a credit institution is entitled by virtue of a consumer credit agreement, that is to say, the annual percentage rate of charge under a credit agreement, formed in particular by the interest rate, whether fixed or variable, bank commissions, and the other fees included and defined in the agreement?

2.

Can Article 4(2) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC be interpreted as permitting a Member State which has transposed that provision into national law to allow steps to be taken, in the exercise of judicial power, to check whether contractual terms relating to the main subject matter of the contract and the adequacy of the price are unfair?


(1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).


Top