This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021CA0215
Case C-215/21: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia no 2 de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria — Spain) — Zulima v Servicios prescriptor y medios de pagos EFC SAU (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Unfair terms in consumer contracts — Revolving credit agreement — Unfairness of the term relating to the rate of remunerative interest — Action brought by a consumer for a declaration that that agreement is void — Satisfaction of that consumer’s claims out of court — Costs incurred having to be borne by the consumer — Principle of effectiveness — National legislation capable of dissuading the consumer from exercising the rights conferred by Directive 93/13/EEC)
Case C-215/21: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia no 2 de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria — Spain) — Zulima v Servicios prescriptor y medios de pagos EFC SAU (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Unfair terms in consumer contracts — Revolving credit agreement — Unfairness of the term relating to the rate of remunerative interest — Action brought by a consumer for a declaration that that agreement is void — Satisfaction of that consumer’s claims out of court — Costs incurred having to be borne by the consumer — Principle of effectiveness — National legislation capable of dissuading the consumer from exercising the rights conferred by Directive 93/13/EEC)
Case C-215/21: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia no 2 de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria — Spain) — Zulima v Servicios prescriptor y medios de pagos EFC SAU (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Unfair terms in consumer contracts — Revolving credit agreement — Unfairness of the term relating to the rate of remunerative interest — Action brought by a consumer for a declaration that that agreement is void — Satisfaction of that consumer’s claims out of court — Costs incurred having to be borne by the consumer — Principle of effectiveness — National legislation capable of dissuading the consumer from exercising the rights conferred by Directive 93/13/EEC)
OJ C 424, 7.11.2022, p. 11–11
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
7.11.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 424/11 |
Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 22 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia no 2 de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria — Spain) — Zulima v Servicios prescriptor y medios de pagos EFC SAU
(Case C-215/21) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Revolving credit agreement - Unfairness of the term relating to the rate of remunerative interest - Action brought by a consumer for a declaration that that agreement is void - Satisfaction of that consumer’s claims out of court - Costs incurred having to be borne by the consumer - Principle of effectiveness - National legislation capable of dissuading the consumer from exercising the rights conferred by Directive 93/13/EEC)
(2022/C 424/11)
Language of the case: Spanish
Referring court
Juzgado de Primera Instancia no 2 de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Ms Zulima
Defendant: Servicios prescriptor y medios de pagos EFC SAU
Operative part of the judgment
Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, read in the light of the principle of effectiveness,
must be interpreted as:
not precluding national legislation, under which, in the context of court proceedings relating to a finding that a term in a contract between a seller or supplier and a consumer is unfair, the consumer concerned must, in the event that his or her claims are satisfied out of court, bear his or her own costs, provided that the court hearing the case necessarily takes account of any bad faith on the part of the seller or supplier concerned and, where appropriate, orders the latter to pay the costs relating to the court proceedings which that consumer was required to institute in order to assert the rights conferred on him or her by Directive 93/13.