- 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-869/19: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 17 May 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo — Spain) — L v Unicaja Banco SA, formerly Banco de Caja España de Inversiones, Salamanca y Soria S.A.U. (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 93/13/EEC — Unfair terms in consumer contracts — Principle of equivalence — Principle of effectiveness — Mortgage agreement — Unfairness of the ‘floor clause’ in the agreement — National rules concerning the judicial appeal procedure — Limitation of the temporal effects of the declaration that an unfair term is void — Restitution — Power of review by the national appeal court of its own motion)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019CA0869
62019CA0869
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
11.7.2022
Official Journal of the European Union
C 266/4
(Case C-869/19) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Principle of equivalence - Principle of effectiveness - Mortgage agreement - Unfairness of the ‘floor clause’ in the agreement - National rules concerning the judicial appeal procedure - Limitation of the temporal effects of the declaration that an unfair term is void - Restitution - Power of review by the national appeal court of its own motion)
(2022/C 266/05)
Language of the case: Spanish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: L
Defendant: Unicaja Banco SA, formerly Banco de Caja España de Inversiones, Salamanca y Soria S.A.U.
Operative part of the judgment
Article 6(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as precluding the application of principles of national judicial procedure, under which a national court, hearing an appeal against a judgment temporally limiting the repayment of sums wrongly paid by the consumer under a term declared to be unfair, cannot raise of its own motion a ground relating to the infringement of that provision and order the repayment of those sums in full, where the failure of the consumer concerned to challenge that temporal limitation cannot be attributed to his or her complete inaction.
(1)
OJ C 87, 16.3.2020.
* * *