3.4.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 121/3

(Case C-724/22, Investcapital)

(2023/C 121/04)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Investcapital Ltd

Defendant: G.H.R.

Questions referred

1.Does Article 7 of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (1) preclude a court, when enforcing an instrument stemming from an order for payment procedure in which a review of unfair terms has already been carried out, from carrying out of its own motion a further review of unfair terms?

If not, does Article 7 of Directive 93/13/EEC preclude the court from asking the party seeking enforcement to provide such information as may be necessary to determine the origin of the amount of the debt, including the principal and, as the case may be, any interest, contractual penalties and other sums, in order to review of its own motion whether those terms are unfair? Does Article 7 of that directive preclude national legislation which does not provide for the possibility of requesting such additional documents during the enforcement procedure?

2.Does the principle of effectiveness of EU law preclude national procedural legislation which prevents or does not provide for a second review of unfair terms by the court of its own motion in the procedure for enforcing a procedural instrument stemming from an order for payment procedure, [if] it is considered that unfair terms may be present on account of an imperfect or incomplete review of unfairness in the prior procedure during which that enforceable instrument was issued?

If so, is the fact that the court may ask the party seeking enforcement to provide such documents as may be necessary to determine the heads of claim under the contract that make up the amount of the debt, in order to review whether any of the terms are unfair, consistent with the principle of effectiveness of EU law?

(1) OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29.