- 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-807/19: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 26 November 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad — Bulgaria) — proceedings brought by DSK Bank EAD and FrontEx International EAD (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure — Consumer protection — Directive 93/13/EEC — Articles 3 and 6 to 8 — Directive 2008/48/EC — Article 22 — Unfair terms in contracts concluded with consumers — Examination by the national court of its own motion — National order for payment procedure)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019CB0807
62019CB0807
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C 44/11
(Case C-807/19) (*)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure - Consumer protection - Directive 93/13/EEC - Articles 3 and 6 to 8 - Directive 2008/48/EC - Article 22 - Unfair terms in contracts concluded with consumers - Examination by the national court of its own motion - National order for payment procedure)
(2021/C 44/15)
Language of the case: Bulgarian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
DSK Bank EAD, FrontEx International EAD
Operative part of the order
1.EU law must be interpreted as precluding a national court, hearing an application for an order for payment, from failing to examine the potentially unfair nature of a term of a contract concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer, on account of practical difficulties, such as its workload.
2.Articles 6(1) and 7(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as not precluding a national court, hearing an application for an order for payment, where it suspects that that application is based on an unfair term in the consumer loan contract, within the meaning of Directive 93/13, from being entitled, where the consumer does not object, to request further information from the creditor in order to examine the potentially unfair nature of that term.
3.Articles 3 and 8 of Directive 93/13, read in conjunction with Articles 6 and 7 of that Directive, must be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of an examination of its own motion of the potentially unfair nature of terms in a contract concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer, carried out by the national court in order to determine whether there is a significant imbalance between the obligations of the parties under that contract, that court may also take into account national provisions ensuring a higher level of protection for consumers than that provided for by that directive.
(*) Language of the case: Bulgarian.
ECLI:EU:C:2021:140
[Signatures]
* * *
(*) Language of the case: Bulgarian.