I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
C series
—
(C/2025/4263)
Language of the case: Spanish
Applicants: GQ, IF
Defendants: MVCI Management, SL, MVCI Holidays, SL, MCVI Playa Andaluza Holidays, SL
Should Directives 94/47/EC (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>) and 2008/122/EC (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">2</span>) and the case-law of the CJEU on the principle of effectiveness of EU law be interpreted as not precluding a national rule or case-law that establishes the starting point for the limitation period for bringing an action for restitution at the time when a timeshare or similar contract is concluded, in cases where the contract is fundamentally null and void because of circumstances that are directly discernible from the time when it was concluded, such as the excessively long duration of the contract or a failure to clearly specify its subject matter?
Should Directives 94/47/EC and 2008/122/EC and the case-law of the CJEU on the principle of effectiveness of EU law be interpreted as not precluding a national rule or case-law that establishes the starting point for the limitation period for an action to recover the amount of the contract price as a penalty for having received advance payments at the time when the prohibited payments were made under a timeshare or similar contract?
—
Directive 94/47/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 26 October 1994 on the protection of purchasers in respect of certain aspects of contracts relating to the purchase of the right to use immovable properties on a timeshare basis (OJ 1994 L 280, p. 83).
Directive 2008/122/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 January 2009 on the protection of consumers in respect of certain aspects of timeshare, long-term holiday product, resale and exchange contracts (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ 2009 L 33, p. 10).
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4263/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—