Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2001:684
Date: 2001-12-13
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Consumer protection;Approximation of laws
Concepts: Off-premises contracts
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Approximation of laws — Consumer protection in respect of contracts negotiated 
away from business premises — Directive 85/577 — Scope — Credit agreement 
secured by a charge on immovable property — Included — Consumer's right of 
cancellation 
(Council Directive 85/577, Arts 1, 3(2)(a) and 5) 
I - 9945 
SUMMARY — CASE C-481/99 
2. Approximation of laws — Consumer protection in respect of contracts negotiated 
away from business premises — Directive 85/577 — Period from the conclusion of 
the contract within which a consumer who has not been given certain information may 
exercise his right of cancellation — Not permissible 
(Council Directive 83/577, Arts 4 and 5)) 
1. Directive 85/577 to protect the consu­
mer in respect of contracts negotiated 
away from business premises is to be 
interpreted as applying to a credit 
agreement secured by a charge on 
immovable property, with the result 
that the right of cancellation provided 
for in Article 5 of that directive is 
available to a consumer who has 
entered into a contract of that type in 
one of the cases specified in Article 1. 
Whilst a secured-credit agreement is 
linked to a right relating to immovable 
property, in that the loan must be 
secured by a charge on immovable 
property, that feature is not sufficient 
for the agreement to be regarded as 
concerning a right relating to immova­
ble property for the purposes of Arti­
cle 3(2)(a) of Directive 85/577. For 
consumers, whom Directive 85/577 is 
designed to protect, and for lenders, the 
subject-matter of such a credit agree­
ment is a grant of funds which is linked 
to a corresponding obligation of repay­
ment together with interest. The fact 
that the credit agreement is secured by 
a charge on immovable property does 
not render any less necessary the pro­
tection which is accorded to the con­
sumer who has entered into that agree­
ment away from the trader's business 
premises. 
Furthermore, neither the preamble to 
nor the provisions of Directive 87/102 
for the approximation of the laws, 
regulations and administrative provi­
sions of the Member States concerning 
consumer credit contain anything to 
show that the Community legislature 
intended, in adopting it, to limit the 
scope of Directive 85/577 in order to 
exclude secured-credit agreements 
from the specific protection provided 
by that directive. 
(see paras 32-34, 39-40 and 
operative part 1) 
2. Directive 85/577 to protect the consu­
mer in respect of contracts negotiated 
I - 9946 
HEININGER 
away from business premises precludes 
the national legislature from imposing 
a time-limit of one year from the 
conclusion of the contract within 
which the right of cancellation provi­
ded for in Article 5 of that directive 
may be exercised, where the consumer 
has not received the information speci­
fied in Article 4. 
(see para. 48 and 
operative part 2) 
I - 9947