- 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-178/23, ERB New Europe Funding II: Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 November 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Specializat Mureş – Romania) – ERB New Europe Funding II v YI (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Directive 93/13/EEC – Article 7(1) – Unfair terms in consumer contracts – Powers and obligations of the national court – First legal remedy pursued by the consumer before the court of the place where the seller or supplier has its registered office, without the assistance of a lawyer and without that consumer attending the hearing – Second legal remedy pursued by the consumer before the court of his or her place of domicile, with the assistance of a lawyer – Res judicata – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Effective judicial protection of the consumer)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CA0178
62023CA0178
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 series
—
C/2025/38
6.1.2025
(Case C-178/23,
ERB New Europe Funding II)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive 93/13/EEC - Article 7(1) - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Powers and obligations of the national court - First legal remedy pursued by the consumer before the court of the place where the seller or supplier has its registered office, without the assistance of a lawyer and without that consumer attending the hearing - Second legal remedy pursued by the consumer before the court of his or her place of domicile, with the assistance of a lawyer - Res judicata - Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Effective judicial protection of the consumer)
(C/2025/38)
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant for revision: ERB New Europe Funding II
Respondent: YI
Operative part of the judgment
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 twenty-fourth recital of that directive, the principle of effectiveness, and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
must be interpreted as not requiring a national court or tribunal to examine whether the terms of a contract concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer are unfair where those terms have already been examined by another national court or tribunal whose decision has the force of res judicata, even if, before that other court or tribunal, the consumer was not assisted by a lawyer, did not attend the hearing and did not make use of a remedy which was available to him or her, provided that that decision was duly notified to the consumer, together with an indication of the remedies available to him or her, and that there are no other particular reasons connected with the conduct of the proceedings, such as a failure to state the reasons for that decision, which could have prevented or dissuaded the consumer from properly exercising his or her procedural rights.
—
(1) OJ C 278, 7.8.2023.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/38/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—
—