Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2000:152
Date: 2000-03-23
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Fifth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Consumer protection;Approximation of laws
Concepts: Consumer credit
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary report of reactions and comments [COM(97) 465 final]. 39: - Report of 11 May 1995, cited above, point 345 (my italics). In its report of 24 September 1997, cited above, the Commission confirmed that: 40: - European Parliament Resolution of 11.03.97 on the Commission report on the operation of Directive 87/102 [COM(95)0117 - C4-0185/95] (OJ C 115, p. 27, point 16, my italics). 41: - Directive 87/102 also pursues a second objective, 'the establishment of a common market in consumer credit‘ (fifth recital). For this purpose it intends to remove distortion of competition between grantors of credit in the Community (second recital) as well as obstacles to the free movement of goods and services obtainable by consumers on credit (fourth recital). 42: - Directive 87/102 also provides for the adoption of certain requirements which are to apply to all forms of credit (tenth recital). 43: - Directives 90/88 and 98/7 amended Directive 87/102 with a view to introducing a single method of calculating the annual percentage rate across the whole of the European Community. 44: - Directive 87/102 defines the 'annual percentage rate of charge‘ as 'the total cost of credit to the consumer, expressed as an annual percentage of the amount of the credit granted and calculated in accordance with Article 1a‘ [Article 1(2)(e)]. 45: - See, inter alia, the observations by the Commission (point 7); M. Siepert‘s observations (point III.6), and the arguments expounded by the French Government during the oral procedure. 46: - Points 15 and 18 of its observations. 47: - Point 9 of its observations. 48: - See the observations of the Spanish Government (point 8); the observations of the French Government (point 4.2); the observations of the Commission (point III.1), and the observations of M. Siepert (point III.4). 49: - Point 18. 50: - Dietzinger judgment, point 20. 51: - This interpretation is confirmed by paragraph 22 of the Dietzinger judgment where the Court held: '... it is apparent from the wording of Article 1 of Directive 85/577 and from the ancillary nature of guarantees that the directive [85/577] covers only a guarantee ancillary to a contract whereby, in the context of ”doorstep selling”, a consumer assumes obligations towards the trader with a view to obtaining goods or services from him.‘ 52: - On the subject of Directive 85/577 see the arguments expounded by Advocate General Jacobs in his Opinion in the Dietzinger case. 53: - Point 39. 54: - Point 43.