1.

Are Article 1(2) and Article 4(2) of Directive 93/13/EEC, (1) as interpreted in Case C-186/16, Andriciuc and Others, to be interpreted as meaning that, where the contract contains a term relating to exchange rate risk that reflects a provision of national law, national courts are required to examine as a first priority the relevance of the exclusion laid down in Article 1(2) of the directive, or instead the trader’s compliance with the obligation to provide information governed by Article 4(2) of the directive, without first assessing the relevance of the provisions of Article 1(2) of the directive?

2.

Are Article 1(2) and Article 4(2) of Directive 93/13/EEC to be interpreted as meaning that, in the event of a failure to comply with the obligation to inform the consumer prior to the conclusion of the loan agreement, the trader may rely on the provisions of Article 1(2) of the directive, so that a contractual term relating to exchange rate risk that reflects a provision of national law is excluded from any assessment of whether the contractual terms are unfair?