# C_2021368EN.01000602.xml

| 13.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 368/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 368/6

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 17 June 2021 — TBI Bank EAD

(Case C-379/21)

(2021/C 368/04)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Sofiyski rayonen sad

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant in the main proceedings: TBI Bank EAD

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Article 6(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC (1) be interpreted as requiring the national court, in proceedings to which the debtor is not party until the issuance of a court order for immediate payment, to assess of its own motion the unfairness of a contractual term, including if there is a mere suspicion that the term is unfair, and disapply it? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Article 6(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC (1) be interpreted as requiring the national court, in proceedings to which the debtor is not party until the issuance of a court order for immediate payment, to assess of its own motion the unfairness of a contractual term, including if there is a mere suspicion that the term is unfair, and disapply it?

| 2. | If the first question is answered in the affirmative, is the national court required to refuse to issue a court decision ordering immediate payment altogether where only part of the claim made is based on a likely unfair contractual term giving rise to the amount of the claim, including in cases where, in proceedings to which the debtor is not party until the issuance of a court order for immediate payment, it is not possible to determine the specific amount of all the elements of the claims based on terms which are not suspected of being unfair? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the first question is answered in the affirmative, is the national court required to refuse to issue a court decision ordering immediate payment altogether where only part of the claim made is based on a likely unfair contractual term giving rise to the amount of the claim, including in cases where, in proceedings to which the debtor is not party until the issuance of a court order for immediate payment, it is not possible to determine the specific amount of all the elements of the claims based on terms which are not suspected of being unfair?

| 3. | If the first question is answered in the affirmative and the second in the negative, is the national court required partially to refuse to issue a court decision ordering payment in respect of the part of the claim that is based on the unfair term? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If the first question is answered in the affirmative and the second in the negative, is the national court required partially to refuse to issue a court decision ordering payment in respect of the part of the claim that is based on the unfair term?

| 4. | If the third question is answered in the affirmative, is the national court required, and, if so, under what conditions, to take into account of its own motion the consequences of the unfairness of a term in the case where it has available to it information about a payment based on that term, inter alia by offsetting that payment against other outstanding debts under the contract, as provided for in respect of similar cases under national law? |
| --- | --- |

4.

If the third question is answered in the affirmative, is the national court required, and, if so, under what conditions, to take into account of its own motion the consequences of the unfairness of a term in the case where it has available to it information about a payment based on that term, inter alia by offsetting that payment against other outstanding debts under the contract, as provided for in respect of similar cases under national law?

| 5. | If the second, third and fourth questions are answered in the affirmative, is the national court bound by the instructions of a higher court which, under national law, are binding on the instance under review, in the case where those instructions do not take the consequences of the unfairness of a contractual term in the consumer contract into account? |
| --- | --- |

5.

If the second, third and fourth questions are answered in the affirmative, is the national court bound by the instructions of a higher court which, under national law, are binding on the instance under review, in the case where those instructions do not take the consequences of the unfairness of a contractual term in the consumer contract into account?

---

(1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).

---