# C_2010328EN.01001502.xml

| 4.12.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 328/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 328/15

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Okresný súd Prešov lodged on 16 September 2010 — Jana Pereničová, Vladislav Perenič v S.O.S. financ, spol. sro

(Case C-453/10)

()

2010/C 328/28

Language of the case: Slovakian

Referring court

Referring court

Okresný súd Prešov

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Jana Pereničová, Vladislav Perenič

Applicants:

Defendant: S.O.S. financ, spol. sro

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is the scope of consumer protection under Article 6(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC (1) of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (‘Directive 93/13/EEC’) such as to make it possible, where unfair contractual clauses are found in a consumer contract, to conclude that the contract as a whole is not binding on the consumer, if that is more advantageous to the consumer? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the scope of consumer protection under Article 6(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC (1) of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (‘Directive 93/13/EEC’) such as to make it possible, where unfair contractual clauses are found in a consumer contract, to conclude that the contract as a whole is not binding on the consumer, if that is more advantageous to the consumer?

1

| 2. | Are the criteria determining what is an unfair commercial practice in accordance with European Parliament and Council Directive 2005/29/EC (2) of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business to consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council such as to permit the conclusion that, if a supplier quotes in the contract a lower annual percentage rate (APR) than is in fact the case, it is possible to regard that step by the supplier towards the consumer as an unfair commercial practice? If there is a finding of an unfair commercial practice, does Directive 2005/29/EC permit there to be any impact on the validity of a credit agreement and on the achievement of the objective in Article 4(1) and Article 6(1) of Directive 93/13, if invalidity of the contract is more advantageous for the consumer? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Are the criteria determining what is an unfair commercial practice in accordance with European Parliament and Council Directive 2005/29/EC (2) of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business to consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council such as to permit the conclusion that, if a supplier quotes in the contract a lower annual percentage rate (APR) than is in fact the case, it is possible to regard that step by the supplier towards the consumer as an unfair commercial practice? If there is a finding of an unfair commercial practice, does Directive 2005/29/EC permit there to be any impact on the validity of a credit agreement and on the achievement of the objective in Article 4(1) and Article 6(1) of Directive 93/13, if invalidity of the contract is more advantageous for the consumer?

2

---

(1)  OJ L 112, p. 29.

1

(2)  OJ L 149, p. 22.

2

---