- 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-123/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Giurgiu (Romania) lodged on 6 March 2012 — SC Volksbank România S.A. v Comisariatul Județean pentru Protecția Consumatorilor Giurgiu
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012CN0123
62012CN0123
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
26.5.2012
Official Journal of the European Union
C 151/19
(Case C-123/12)
2012/C 151/33
Language of the case: Romanian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: SC Volksbank România S.A.
Defendant: Comisariatul Județean pentru Protecția Consumatorilor Giurgiu
Questions referred
1.Can Article 4(2) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC be interpreted as meaning that ‘main subject matter of the contract’ and ‘price’, as referred to in that provision, cover the elements which make up the consideration to which a credit institution is entitled by virtue of a consumer credit agreement, that is to say, the annual percentage rate of charge under a credit agreement, formed in particular by the interest rate, whether fixed or variable, bank commissions, and the other fees included and defined in the agreement?
2.Can Article 4(2) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC be interpreted as permitting a Member State which has transposed that provision into national law to allow steps to be taken, in the exercise of judicial power, to check whether contractual terms relating to the main subject matter of the contract and the adequacy of the price are unfair?
Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).