Summary;Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2025:37
Date: 2025-01-23
Language of the case: Slovak
Court formation: Seventh Chamber
Subject matter: Consumer protection;Approximation of laws
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Slovakia

Summary C-677/23–1 
Case C-677/23 
Summary of the request for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 98(1) of 
the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice 
Date lodged:  
14 November 2023 
Referring Court:  
Krajský súd v Prešove (Regional Court, Prešov) (Slovakia) 
Date of the decision to refer:  
12 October 2023 
Applicants: 
A.B. 
F.B. 
Defendant:  
Slovenská sporiteľňa, a.s. 
      
EN 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-677/23 
 
2  
 
Subject matter of the main proceedings 
Appeal against a judgment in proceedings for a declaration that a loan is interest-
free and charge-free, for recovery of unjust enrichment, and for a declaration that 
contractual terms are unfair. 
Subject matter and legal basis of the request  
The referring court requests an interpretation of Article 10(2)(c) of Directive 
2008/48 in connection with the requirement to specify the duration of a credit 
agreement in a clear and concise manner and asks whether the specification in a 
credit agreement of the duration of that agreement corresponds to the period 
defined as ‘during … a commercial transaction’ within the meaning of 
Article 3(1) of Directive 2005/29. The referring court also requests an 
interpretation of Article 10(2)(g) of Directive 2008/48 in connection with the 
requirement to specify in a clear and concise manner in a credit agreement all the 
assumptions used in order to calculate the annual percentage rate of charge. 
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling 
A.1 Must Article 10(2)(c) of 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) (‘Directive 
2008/48’) be interpreted as meaning that the specification of the duration of the 
credit agreement in a clear and concise manner in the contractual terms: 
– requires the duration of the credit agreement to be specified expressly, 
for example by stating the date of the conclusion and expiry of the 
agreement (from … to …) or, alternatively, by using calendar units of 
time such as, for example, months or years (e.g. for a period of one 
year), or 
– is it sufficient if it is done in such a way that the consumer is to 
calculate the duration of the agreement or determine it in some other 
way on the basis of the contractual terms, for example on the basis of 
the number of monthly instalments or the time at which the credit is 
repaid in full? 
A.2 Must Article 10(2)(c) of Directive 2008/48 be interpreted as meaning that 
the specification in a credit agreement of the duration of that agreement 
corresponds to a period defined as ‘during … a commercial transaction’ within the 
meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and 
of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer 
SLOVENSKÁ SPORITEĽŇA 
 
3 
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 (‘Directive 2005/29’)? 
B Must Article 10(2)(g) of Directive 2008/48, in the sections stating ‘in a clear 
and concise manner’ and ‘all the assumptions used in order to calculate that rate’, 
be interpreted as meaning that: 
– the assumptions used in order to calculate the annual percentage rate of 
charge (APRC) must be expressly identified in the agreement as the 
assumptions used in order to calculate the APRC, or 
– the consumer is him or herself to determine the relevant assumptions 
used in order to calculate the APRC on the basis of the contractual 
terms? 
Provisions of European Union law cited 
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) (‘Directive 2008/48’), Articles 5(1)(g), 
6(1)(f), 10(2)(c), (d), (f), (g) and (h), 10(5)(f), and 19(5), and Annex III, point 3 
Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council 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 
(‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’), (OJ 2005 L 149, p. 22) (‘Directive 
2005/29’), Articles 3(1) and 7(1) 
Provisions of national law cited 
Zákon č. 129/2010 Z. z. o spotrebiteľských úveroch a o iných úveroch a 
pôžičkách pre spotrebiteľov a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov (Law 
No 129/2010 on consumer credit and other forms of credit and loans for 
consumers, amending certain other laws; ‘Law No 129/2010’): Articles 9(2) and 
11(1). 
Article 9(2) of Law No 129/2010 provides that ‘a consumer credit agreement 
must, in addition to the general requirements set out in the Občiansky zákonník 
[Civil Code], state the following: 
[…] 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-677/23 
 
4  
(f) the duration of the consumer credit agreement and the date of the final 
repayment of the consumer credit, 
(g) the total amount and specific currency of the consumer credit and the 
conditions governing the drawdown of the credit, 
[…] 
(i) the borrowing rate, the conditions governing the application thereof, the 
index or reference rate to which the borrowing rate is linked, and also the periods 
during which the borrowing rate is changed, and the conditions for and the way in 
which the change is to take place; if different borrowing rates apply in different 
circumstances, the abovementioned information shall be provided in respect of all 
the different borrowing rates applicable, 
, 
(j) the annual percentage rate of charge and the total amount the consumer is 
required to pay, calculated on the basis of current data at the time the consumer 
credit agreement is concluded; all the assumptions used in calculating the annual 
percentage rate of charge, 
(k) the amount, number and frequency of payments and, where appropriate, the 
order in which payments will be allocated to different outstanding balances 
charged at different borrowing rates for the purposes of reimbursement, 
(l) […], 
(m) a concise statement showing the periods and conditions for the payment of 
the interest and any associated recurrent or non-recurrent charges, where the 
charges and interest are to be paid without capital amortisation, 
(n) where applicable, the charges for maintaining one or more accounts 
recording both payment transactions and drawdowns and, if the opening of an 
account is obligatory, and also the charges for using a means of payment for both 
payment transactions and drawdowns, and any other charges deriving from the 
consumer credit agreement, and the conditions under which those charges may be 
changed, 
[…] 
(r) the amount of the charges born by the consumer for notarial acts, in so far as 
they are known to the creditor. 
[…]’. 
Under Article 11(1) of that law, ‘a consumer credit granted is to be regarded as 
interest-free and free of charges if: 
SLOVENSKÁ SPORITEĽŇA 
 
5 
[…] 
(b) the consumer credit agreement is not in written form in accordance with 
Article 9(1) and does not contain the elements specified in Article 9(2)(a) to (k), 
(r) and (y), 
[…]’. 
Zákon č. 40/1964 Zb., občiansky zákonník (Law No 40/1964 establishing the 
Civil Code), ‘the Civil Code’, Article 122(1) and (2). 
Under Article 122(1) of the Civil Code, ‘a period expressed in days shall 
commence from the day following the event on which its commencement 
depends. Half a month shall be deemed to be fifteen days’. 
Under 122(2) of the Civil Code, ‘the end of a period expressed in weeks, months 
or years shall fall on the day by which, in terms of its name or number, 
corresponds to the day on which the event, from which the period begins, falls. If 
there is no such day in the last month, the end of the period shall fall on the last 
day of that month’. 
Succinct presentation of the facts and procedure in the main proceedings 
1 The applicants in the present case concluded a consumer credit agreement with the 
defendant bank on 29 October 2014 and the amount of the credit was transferred 
to their bank account on the same day. The credit agreement was concluded for a 
fixed term and the applicants undertook to repay the credit in 108 monthly 
instalments of EUR 54.20 each. The monthly instalments were to be paid by the 
twentieth of each month. The first instalment was to be paid on 20 December 
2014 and the final repayment date of the loan was set at 20 November 2023. The 
annual percentage rate of charge (APRC) was set at 17.93% and the total amount 
to be repaid was EUR 5 858.98. 
2 The paragraph of the consumer credit agreement entitled ‘Assumptions used to 
calculate the APRC’ read: ‘The credit has been granted immediately, in full; the 
borrower shall fulfil his obligations under the terms and conditions and within the 
time limits set out in the credit agreement; the interest rate shall apply until the 
end of the credit relationship’. Paragraph 12 of Part III of the agreement stipulated 
that ‘the agreement shall be concluded for a […] fixed period until the full 
settlement of all relationships arising in connection with the credit granted’. 
3 The applicants challenged the credit agreement in an action brought before the 
Okresný súd Prešov (District Court, Prešov, Slovakia), claiming that the 
agreement infringes the applicants’ rights as consumers because it does not 
specify the duration of the agreement or state the assumptions used to calculate 
the APRC. 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-677/23 
 
6  
4 The court of first instance dismissed the action on the ground that that it is 
sufficient that the duration of the agreement can be inferred from the terms of the 
credit agreement, and specifically the number of monthly instalments and the 
dates of the first and final instalment to be paid. 
5 The applicants lodged an appeal against that judgment with the Krajský súd v 
Prešove (Regional Court in Prešov, Slovakia), which is the national court making 
the present reference for a preliminary ruling (the ‘referring court’). 
The essential arguments of the parties in the main proceedings 
6 The applicants argue that the consumer credit agreement repeatedly infringes their 
rights as consumers and claim that the agreement does not specify the duration of 
the agreement and state the assumptions used to calculate the APRC. If the 
applicants’ claims were found to be well-founded, they could seek penalties for 
infringement of their rights as consumers, even in the form of deprivation of the 
bank of its right to interest. 
7 The applicants consider that the section of the agreement stating that ‘the 
agreement shall be concluded for a fixed period until the full settlement of all 
relationships arising in connection with the credit granted’ is unclear and replaces 
the obligatory specification of the duration of the credit agreement. The applicants 
take the position that the duration of the credit agreement should be set out clearly 
in the credit agreement so that the consumer does not have to establish it by 
inference from other terms of the agreement. 
Succinct presentation of the reasoning in the request for a preliminary ruling 
The first question: 
8 The referring court notes, first of all, that the Court of Justice in Case C-42/15 has 
already interpreted the clarity and precision of the obligatory information in a 
consumer credit agreement, specifically with regard to information on the amount, 
number and frequency of repayments. In its judgment of 9 November 2016, Home 
Credit Slovakia, C-42/15, EU:C:2016:842, paragraph 50, the Court of Justice 
pointed out that a credit agreement need not indicate the specific date on which 
every payment falls due, ‘provided that the terms of the agreement allow the 
consumer to ascertain the dates of those payments without difficulty and with 
certainty’. 
9 However, the referring court considers that information about the duration of the 
agreement cannot be established without difficulty on the basis of other 
contractual terms, such as those relating to instalments, or by reference to [the 
date of] full repayment of all liabilities. 
SLOVENSKÁ SPORITEĽŇA 
 
7 
10 The referring court considers that the payment dates of the first and final 
instalments may not correspond to the actual duration of the agreement. The 
particular point here is that the subject matter of the credit agreement is a service 
which, unlike the purchase of goods, is provided for a fixed term and the 
consumer is entitled to take advantage of the credit service for the entire duration 
of its provision. 
11 Although, in the view of the court of first instance, the duration of the agreement 
may also be determined on the basis of an agreement under which the contractual 
relationship is entered into for a fixed term until all the relationships arising on the 
basis of or in connection with the loan have been fully settled, the referring court 
considers that, since the directive requires the duration of the agreement to be 
specified in a clear and concise manner, it is very difficult to determine the precise 
time frame of the credit service, and thus also the duration thereof and the specific 
moment at which all the liabilities are actually settled. Although the credit 
agreement is concluded for a fixed period, the duration of the agreement until all 
liabilities have been fully settled is not specified. 
12 In that regard, the referring court refers to the EU legislation on the concept of the 
‘duration of the credit agreement’. In its view, it is clear that Directive 2008/48 
places systemic importance on the duration of the agreement, which reinforces the 
conclusion that it is not sufficient for consumers to be able to calculate or presume 
the duration of the agreement. It may be considered that if the consumer had to 
calculate (by reference to the instalments) or presume (by reference to the final 
repayment of the credit) the duration of the credit agreement, such calculations or 
presumptions as to the duration of the agreement do not appear to meet the 
requirement relating to clarity and conciseness laid down in Article 10(2) of 
Directive 2008/48. 
13 Slovak law, in Paragraph 122 of the Civil Code, provides for the calculation of 
time in, inter alia, months and years, and therefore, in the view of the referring 
court, the specification of the duration of the agreement in months or years could 
correspond to the express specification of the duration of the credit agreement and 
thus satisfy the requirement relating to clarity and conciseness laid down in 
Directive 2008/48. 
14 The referring court also takes the position that the precise limits of the duration of 
a credit agreement are important for consumers, not only from the perspective of 
exercising rights over the duration of the agreement but also from the perspective 
of determining when there is a period before, during and after a commercial 
transaction in relation to a product within the meaning of Article 3(1) of Directive 
2005/29. 
15 The referring court sees a link between Directive 2005/29, Directive 2008/48 and 
Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer 
contracts (see judgment of the Court of Justice of 15 March 2012, Pereničová and 
Perenič, C-453/10, EU:C:2012:144). Although the referring court is not seeking 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-677/23 
 
8  
an interpretation of Directive 93/13, it cannot be ruled out that, in particular with 
regard to the requirement that contractual terms be specific, it will be important to 
attain the objectives of Directive 93/13 (see judgment of the Court of Justice of 
20 September 2017, Andriciuc and Others, C-186/16, EU:C:2017:703). The 
proceedings also involve an assessment of whether the assumptions used to 
calculate the APRC are appropriate, and thus the referring court also intends to 
address unfair and misleading commercial practices, which gives rise to the 
question whether the period after the commercial transaction within the meaning 
of Article 3(1) of Directive 2005/29 corresponds to the period after the end of the 
service, which could overlap with the period after the end of the duration of the 
agreement. 
The second question: 
16 It is clear from the wording of Article 10(2) of Directive 2008/48 that it requires 
the credit agreement to specify the assumptions used in order to calculate the 
APRC [subparagraph (g)], even though the same Article 10(2) also requires the 
separate specification of individual assumptions, such as, for example, the amount 
of credit [subparagraph (d)], the amount, number and frequency of payments 
[subparagraph (h)], and the charges [subparagraph (k)]. In this context, the 
question arises as to why Directive 2008/48 requires that, in addition to the APRC 
itself, all assumptions used in order to calculate the APRC also be specified, when 
all assumptions necessary in order to calculate the APRC are required separately 
as obligatory information in the credit agreement. 
17 The referring court considers the assumptions used in order to calculate the APRC 
must be specified in view of the requirement relating to transparency of the 
information on the APRC and, maybe, the possibility of verifying that that 
information is correct. That view is supported by the requirement contained in the 
introduction to Article 10(2) that those assumptions be specified ‘in a clear and 
concise manner’. The referring court considers that the average consumer is 
unable to identify all the assumptions used in order to calculate the APRC on the 
basis of an agreement, which has a large number of pages. In the present case, the 
agreement and the Standard European Consumer Credit Information form run to 
ten pages. 
18 If the individual constituents of the APRC were specified in the credit agreement 
as assumptions used in order to calculate the APRC, the consumer would be much 
better informed. This is most clearly seen in the case of the charge for maintaining 
a credit account [Article 10(2)(k) of Directive 2008/48], where the creditor does 
not include such a charge in the calculation of the APRC, assuming that such a 
charge has been voluntarily agreed, although in fact the consumer has not 
voluntarily agreed to it, and it is not clear from the wording of the agreement 
whether or not such a charge has been included in the calculation of the APRC. A 
requirement to identify such a charge as an ‘assumption used in order to calculate 
the APRC’ would make it possible to determine whether the creditor had included 
such a charge in the calculations. 
SLOVENSKÁ SPORITEĽŇA 
 
9 
19 The referring considers that the directive requires not only that the assumptions 
used in order to calculate the APR be specified, but also that they be specified in a 
clear and concise manner. That requirement is fulfilled if the assumptions are set 
out in summary form, otherwise the requirement relating clarity and conciseness 
may not be satisfied since the formula in point 1 of Annex I to Directive 2008/48 
is not in itself straightforward and, if the consumer himself has to identify in the 
agreement the various assumptions used in order to calculate the APRC, such an 
arrangement (formula and the need to identify them in an extensive agreement) 
does not appear to be clear and concise. 
20 The referring court considers that Directive 2008/48 [Articles 5(1)(g), 6(1)(f), 
10(5)(f), 19(5), point 3 of Annex III] repeatedly specifies the assumptions used in 
order to calculate the APRC as a legal arrangement, which indicates the validity of 
the assumptions used in order to calculate the APRC, and implicitly also requires 
that all the assumptions used to calculate the APRC be set out in summary form.