# C_2020271EN.01002701.xml

| 17.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/27

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 29 May 2020 — P v ‘K’ EOOD

(Case C-229/20)

(2020/C 271/35)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Sofiyski rayonen sad

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: P

Defendant:‘K’ EOOD

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Article 3(g) of Directive 2008/48/EC (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the fees for ancillary services agreed in connection with a consumer credit agreement, such as fees for the possibility of deferring and reducing instalments, constitute part of the annual percentage rate of charge for the credit? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 3(g) of Directive 2008/48/EC (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the fees for ancillary services agreed in connection with a consumer credit agreement, such as fees for the possibility of deferring and reducing instalments, constitute part of the annual percentage rate of charge for the credit?

| 2. | Is Article 10(2)(g) of Directive 2008/48/EC to be interpreted as meaning that an incorrect indication of the annual percentage rate of charge in a credit agreement between a trader and a consumer borrower must be regarded as a failure to indicate the annual percentage rate of charge in the credit agreement and that the national court must apply the legal consequences provided for under national law for failure to indicate the annual percentage rate of charge in a consumer credit agreement? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is Article 10(2)(g) of Directive 2008/48/EC to be interpreted as meaning that an incorrect indication of the annual percentage rate of charge in a credit agreement between a trader and a consumer borrower must be regarded as a failure to indicate the annual percentage rate of charge in the credit agreement and that the national court must apply the legal consequences provided for under national law for failure to indicate the annual percentage rate of charge in a consumer credit agreement?

| 3. | Is Article 22(4) of Directive 2008/48/EC to be interpreted as meaning that a penalty provided for under national law, in the form of nullity of the consumer credit agreement, whereby only the principal amount granted is to be repaid, is proportionate if the annual percentage rate of charge is not accurately indicated in the consumer credit agreement? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Is Article 22(4) of Directive 2008/48/EC to be interpreted as meaning that a penalty provided for under national law, in the form of nullity of the consumer credit agreement, whereby only the principal amount granted is to be repaid, is proportionate if the annual percentage rate of charge is not accurately indicated in the consumer credit agreement?

| 4. | Is Article 4(1) and (2) of Directive 93/13/EEC (2) to be interpreted as meaning that the fees for a package of ancillary services provided for in a separate supplementary agreement to a consumer credit agreement as the main agreement must be regarded as part of the main subject matter of the latter agreement and cannot therefore be the subject of the assessment of unfairness? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Is Article 4(1) and (2) of Directive 93/13/EEC (2) to be interpreted as meaning that the fees for a package of ancillary services provided for in a separate supplementary agreement to a consumer credit agreement as the main agreement must be regarded as part of the main subject matter of the latter agreement and cannot therefore be the subject of the assessment of unfairness?

| 5. | Irrespective of the answer to the third question, is Article 3(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC in conjunction with point 1(o) of the annex to that directive to be interpreted as meaning that a term in an agreement for ancillary services relating to consumer credit is unfair if it grants the consumer the abstract possibility of deferring and rescheduling his payments and he owes fees for that possibility even if he does not make use of it? |
| --- | --- |

5.

Irrespective of the answer to the third question, is Article 3(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC in conjunction with point 1(o) of the annex to that directive to be interpreted as meaning that a term in an agreement for ancillary services relating to consumer credit is unfair if it grants the consumer the abstract possibility of deferring and rescheduling his payments and he owes fees for that possibility even if he does not make use of it?

---

(1)  Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC (OJ 2008 L 133, p. 66).

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

---