- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Joined Cases C-453/18 and C-494/18: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 December 2019 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Primera Instancia No 11 de Vigo, Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 20 de Barcelona — Spain) — Bondora AS v Carlos V.C. (Case C-453/18), XY (C-494/18) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — European order for payment procedure — Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 — Provision of additional documents to support the claim — Unfair terms in consumer contracts — Directive 93/13/EEC — Review by the court seised in the context of an application for a European payment order)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018CA0453
62018CA0453
With us you find everything. Try it now!
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C 68/11
(Joined Cases C-453/18 and C-494/18) (*)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - European order for payment procedure - Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 - Provision of additional documents to support the claim - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Directive 93/13/EEC - Review by the court seised in the context of an application for a European payment order)
(2020/C 68/07)
Language of the case: Spanish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Bondora AS
Defendants: Carlos V.C. (Case C-453/18), XY (C-494/18)
Operative part of the judgment
Article 7(2)(d) and (e) of Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment procedure and Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, as interpreted by the Court and read in the light of Article 38 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as allowing a ‘court’, within the meaning of that regulation, seised in the context of a European order for payment procedure, to request from the creditor additional information relating to the terms of the agreement relied on in support of the claim at issue, in order to carry out an ex officio review of the possible unfairness of those terms and, consequently, that they preclude national legislation which declares the additional documents provided for that purpose to be inadmissible.
(*)
Language of the case: Spanish.