EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011CN0397
Case C-397/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Budapest Municipal Court lodged on 27 July 2011 — Jőrös Erika v Aegon Magyarország Hitel Zrt.
Case C-397/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Budapest Municipal Court lodged on 27 July 2011 — Jőrös Erika v Aegon Magyarország Hitel Zrt.
Case C-397/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Budapest Municipal Court lodged on 27 July 2011 — Jőrös Erika v Aegon Magyarország Hitel Zrt.
OJ C 331, 12.11.2011, p. 6–7
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 27/07/2011
- Date lodged:
- 27/07/2011
- Author:
- Court of Justice
- Form:
- Judicial information
- Authentic language:
- Hungarian
- Type of procedure:
- Reference for a preliminary ruling
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Case affecting:
-
- request for interpretation 31993L0013 article 07 P1
- Link
- EUROVOC descriptor:
|
12.11.2011 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 331/6 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Budapest Municipal Court lodged on 27 July 2011 — Jőrös Erika v Aegon Magyarország Hitel Zrt.
(Case C-397/11)
2011/C 331/09
Language of the case: Hungarian
Referring court
Fővárosi Bíróság
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Jőrös Erika
Defendant: Aegon Magyarország Hitel Zrt.
Questions referred
|
1. |
Are the procedures of the national court consistent with Article 7(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC (1) if, having found that one of the contract’s general terms relevant to the claim is unfair, the court examines its invalidity without the parties making a specific application in that regard? |
|
2. |
Must the national court also proceed in accordance with question 1 in a case brought by a consumer where the determination of the invalidity of a general contract term on the ground of unfairness would ordinarily fall under the jurisdiction not of the local court but of a higher court, if the injured party were to bring a claim on that basis? |
|
3. |
In the event that question 2 is answered in the affirmative, may the national court also examine the unfairness of a general contract term in proceedings at second instance if the proceedings at first instance did not examine this and new facts and evidence cannot generally be taken into consideration in appeal proceedings under national law? |
(1) Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).
