CJEU Case C-320/24 / Judgment

CR and TP v Soledil Srl, sous concordat préventif
Deciding body type
Court of Justice of the European Union
Deciding body
Court (Fourth Chamber)
Type
Decision
Decision date
18/12/2025
ECLI (European case law identifier)
ECLI:EU:C:2025:993

Χάρτης των Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης

  • CJEU Case C-320/24 / Judgment

    Key facts of the case:

    Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Unfair terms in consumer contracts – Directive 93/13/EEC – Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) – Power of review and obligations of the national court – Penalty clause – No review of the court’s own motion of whether that term is unfair – Res judicata – Principle of effectiveness – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Reliance on the unfairness of a contractual term before a court to which the case has been remitted following cassation

    Outcome of the case:

    On those grounds, the Court (Fourth Chamber) hereby rules:

    Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, read in the light of the principle of effectiveness and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

    must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which the application of the principle of res judicata does not allow a national court, to which a case has been remitted following cassation, to examine of its own motion the nullity of an allegedly unfair contractual term where (i) the plea of the unfairness of that term was not relied on by the consumer at earlier stages of the judicial proceedings and (ii) the nullity of such a term was not raised by the national courts of their own motion in the proceedings which gave rise to the judgment of the court of last instance.

     

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter

    21. By its question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) of Directive 93/13, read in the light of Article 47 of the Charter, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which the application of the principle of res judicata does not allow a national court, to which the case has been remitted following an appeal on a point of law (‘cassation’), to examine of its own motion the nullity of an allegedly unfair contractual term where (i) the plea of the unfairness of that term was not relied on by the consumer at earlier stages of the judicial proceedings and (ii) the nullity of such a term was not raised by the national courts of their own motion in the proceedings which gave rise to the judgment of the court of last instance.

    ...

    29. In addition, the Court has stated that the obligation on the Member States to ensure the effectiveness of the rights that individuals derive from EU law, particularly the rights deriving from Directive 93/13, implies a requirement for effective judicial protection, reaffirmed in Article 7(1) of that directive and also guaranteed in Article 47 of the Charter, which applies, inter alia, to the definition of detailed procedural rules relating to actions based on such rights (judgment of 17 May 2022, Unicaja Banco, C‑869/19, EU:C:2022:397, paragraph 29 and the case-law cited).

    ...

    42. In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the answer to the question raised is that Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) of Directive 93/13, read in the light of the principle of effectiveness and Article 47 of the Charter, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which the application of the principle of res judicata does not allow a national court, to which a case has been remitted following cassation, to examine of its own motion the nullity of an allegedly unfair contractual term where (i) the plea of the unfairness of that term was not relied on by the consumer at earlier stages of the judicial proceedings and (ii) the nullity of such a term was not raised by the national courts of their own motion in the proceedings which gave rise to the judgment of the court of last instance.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language)