Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/2

(Case C-92/16) (*)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive 93/13/EEC - Articles 6 and 7 - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Accelerated repayment term in a mortgage loan agreement - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Question identical to a question on which the Court has already ruled or where the reply to such a question may be clearly deduced from existing case-law - Declaration that the term is unfair in part - Powers of the national court when dealing with a term regarded as ‘unfair’ - Replacement of the unfair term with a provision of national law - Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Question manifestly inadmissible)

(2020/C 19/02)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Bankia SA

Defendants: Henry-Rodolfo Rengifo Jiménez, Sheyla-Jeanneth Felix Caiza

Operative part of the order

Articles 6 and 7 of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted, on the one hand, as precluding an accelerated repayment term found to be unfair in a mortgage loan contract from being maintained in part through the removal by the national court of the elements which render it unfair. On the other hand, those articles do not preclude the national court from remedying the invalidity of such an unfair term — the wording of which is based on a legislative provision which is applicable where the parties to the contract so agree — by replacing that term with the new wording of that legislative provision introduced after the conclusion of the contract, where the contract at issue is not capable of continuing in existence following the removal of that unfair term and where the cancellation of the contract in its entirety exposes the consumer to particularly unfavourable consequences.

(*)

Language of the case: Spanish.