Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62014CA0032

Case C-32/14: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 1 October 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék — Hungary) — ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt v Attila Sugár (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 93/13/EEC — Unfair terms in consumer contracts concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer — Mortgage loan agreement — Article 7(1) — Stopping the use of unfair terms — Adequate and effective means — Acknowledgement of the debt — Notarised instrument — Affixation of the enforcement clause by a notary — Enforceable order — Notary’s obligations — Examination by the national court of its own motion of unfair terms — Judicial review — Principles of equivalence and effectiveness)

OJ C 381, 16.11.2015, pp. 4–5 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

16.11.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 381/4


Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 1 October 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Törvényszék — Hungary) — ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt v Attila Sugár

(Case C-32/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer - Mortgage loan agreement - Article 7(1) - Stopping the use of unfair terms - Adequate and effective means - Acknowledgement of the debt - Notarised instrument - Affixation of the enforcement clause by a notary - Enforceable order - Notary’s obligations - Examination by the national court of its own motion of unfair terms - Judicial review - Principles of equivalence and effectiveness))

(2015/C 381/04)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Fővárosi Törvényszék

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt

Defendant: Attila Sugár

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 6(1) and 7(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as meaning that they do not preclude national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which allows a notary who drew up, in due form, an authentic instrument concerning a contract concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer, to affix the enforcement clause to that instrument or to refuse to cancel it when no review of the unfairness of the contractual terms has been performed at any stage.


(1)  OJ C 102, 7.4.2014.


Top