# C_2020359EN.01000301.xml

| 26.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 359/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 359/3

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona (Spain) lodged on 20 July 2020 — CDT, S.A. v MIMR, HRMM

(Case C-321/20)

(2020/C 359/05)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: CDT, S.A.

Defendants: MIMR, HRMM

Questions referred

| 1. | Does a judgment [of the Court of Justice] which interprets and applies an EU directive and which holds that a national law is contrary to the directive immediately deprive the national law of effect or must that law continue to apply in relationships between private individuals until such time as it is amended by the national legislature? It is requested that the question be answered generally or in respect of the judgment [of the Court of Justice] of 14 June 2012, (1) and the effects of that judgment on [the original wording of] Article 83 of the General Law for the Protection of Consumers and Users (Ley General para la Defensa de los Consumidores y Usuarios. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does a judgment [of the Court of Justice] which interprets and applies an EU directive and which holds that a national law is contrary to the directive immediately deprive the national law of effect or must that law continue to apply in relationships between private individuals until such time as it is amended by the national legislature? It is requested that the question be answered generally or in respect of the judgment [of the Court of Justice] of 14 June 2012, (1) and the effects of that judgment on [the original wording of] Article 83 of the General Law for the Protection of Consumers and Users (Ley General para la Defensa de los Consumidores y Usuarios.

| 2. | Does the principle of legal certainty inherent in the European Union legal order preclude the complete deletion of the contents of a contractual term, on the grounds that that term is unfair, in cases in which, at the time when the contract was concluded and the term was stipulated, no criterion existed for defining what was unfair in relation to the subject matter of the term because no legal provision or case-law of the courts existed in that regard? If the answer is affirmative, must the effect be that only the part of the term concerned which is considered to be unfair is deleted? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does the principle of legal certainty inherent in the European Union legal order preclude the complete deletion of the contents of a contractual term, on the grounds that that term is unfair, in cases in which, at the time when the contract was concluded and the term was stipulated, no criterion existed for defining what was unfair in relation to the subject matter of the term because no legal provision or case-law of the courts existed in that regard? If the answer is affirmative, must the effect be that only the part of the term concerned which is considered to be unfair is deleted?

| 3. | Does the same principle preclude the application of case-law interpreting a provision of national law to contracts which preceded the establishment of that case-law, which were concluded when the general case-law of the courts was contrary to the new case-law? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does the same principle preclude the application of case-law interpreting a provision of national law to contracts which preceded the establishment of that case-law, which were concluded when the general case-law of the courts was contrary to the new case-law?

---

(1)  Judgment of 14 June 2012, Banco Español de Crédito (C 618/10, EU:C:2012:349).

---