- 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-750/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam (Netherlands) lodged on 3 December 2018 — A, B v C
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018CN0750
62018CN0750
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
11.3.2019
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 93/29
(Case C-750/18)
(2019/C 93/38)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: A, B
Defendant: C
Question referred
How should Directive 93/13, (*) and, more specifically, the principle of cumulative effect contained in it, be interpreted when assessing whether the sum which a consumer who fails to fulfil his obligations is required to pay in compensation (hereinafter: the penalty clause) is disproportionately high within the meaning of point 1(e) of the annex to that directive, in a case in which penalty clauses are associated with a variety of shortcomings of different types which, by their very nature, do not have to occur jointly, and indeed do not do so in the present case?
Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).
* * *
Language of the case: Dutch