- 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
Case C-449/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal d’instance d’Orléans (France) lodged on 12 August 2013 — CA Consumer Finance v Ingrid Bakkaus and Others
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013CN0449
62013CN0449
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
26.10.2013
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 313/11
(Case C-449/13)
2013/C 313/20
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: CA Consumer Finance
Defendants: Ingrid Bakkaus, Charline Bonato, née Savary, Florian Bonato
Questions referred
1.Must Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers be interpreted as meaning that the onus is on creditors to prove that they have correctly and fully performed their obligations under the national law transposing the directive when a credit agreement is entered into and performed?
2.Does Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers preclude a creditor from being able to prove that it has performed its obligations correctly and in full solely by means of a standard term in the credit agreement, whereby the consumer acknowledges the performance of those obligations, without that term being supported by documents issued by the creditor and supplied to the borrower?
3.Must Article 8 of Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements be interpreted as precluding the creditworthiness check from being carried out solely on the basis of information supplied by the consumer, without such information being effectively scrutinised against other evidence?
—Must Article 5(6) of Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements be interpreted as meaning that it is not possible for a creditor to provide adequate explanations to the consumer if it has not checked the consumer’s financial situation and needs beforehand?
—Must Article 5(6) of Directive 2008/48/EC be interpreted as precluding the adequate explanations to be supplied to the consumer being provided only in the contractual information mentioned in the credit agreement, without a specific document being drawn up?
Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC (OJ 2008 L 133, p. 66).
* * *