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
(Case C-167/16) (*)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive 93/13/EEC - Articles 6 and 7 - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Accelerated repayment clause of a mortgage loan contract - 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 clause is unfair in part - Powers of a 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 of Justice - Question manifestly inadmissible)
(2020/C 19/03)
Language of the case: Spanish
Applicant: Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria SA
Defendant: Fernando Quintano Ujeta, María Isabel Sánchez García
Articles 6 and 7 of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted, first, as precluding an accelerated repayment clause of a mortgage loan contract that has been found to be unfair from being maintained in part, with the elements which make it unfair removed by a national court. However, they 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 as amended after the conclusion of the mortgage loan contract, where the contract in question cannot continue in existence if that unfair term is removed, and that the annulment of the contract in its entirety would expose the consumer to particularly unfavourable consequences.
(*)
Language of the case: Spanish
* * *