Case C‑51/13

Nationale-Nederlanden Levensverzekering Mij NV

v

Hubertus Wilhelmus Van Leeuwen

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Rotterdam)

‛Reference for a preliminary ruling — Direct life assurance — Directive 92/96/EEC — Article 31(3) — Information to be provided to the policyholder — Obligation for the insurer to provide further information on costs and premiums under general unwritten rules of national law’

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 29 April 2015

Freedom of movement for persons — Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Direct life assurance — Directive 92/96 — Information to be provided to the policyholder — General principles of domestic law requiring the policyholder to be provided with certain information additional to that referred to in Annex II to the directive — Lawfulness — Conditions — Determination by the national court — Consequences under national law of the failure to provide that additional information — No effect

(Council Directive 92/96, Art. 31(3))

Article 31(3) of Directive 92/96 on the coordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to direct life assurance and amending Directives 79/267 and 90/619 (third life assurance directive) must be interpreted as not precluding an insurance company, on the basis of general principles of domestic law such as ‘open and/or unwritten rules’, from being required to send to policyholders certain information additional to that listed in Annex II to that directive, provided that the information required is clear, accurate and necessary for the policyholder to understand the essential characteristics of the commitment and that it ensures a sufficient level of legal certainty, which it is for the referring court to ascertain.

The legal basis of such an obligation to provide additional information and particularly whether that obligation follows from general principles of domestic law such as the ‘open and/or unwritten rules’ is, in principle, irrelevant as regards its conformity with the directive, provided that that obligation meets the requirements of Article 31(3) of Directive 92/96. It follows therefrom that the legal basis for the use by the Member State concerned of the possibility provided for in Article 31(3) of that directive must be such that, in accordance with the principle of legal certainty, it enables insurance companies to identify with sufficient foreseeability what additional information they must provide and which the policyholder may expect.

The consequences under domestic law of a failure to provide that information are, in principle, irrelevant as regards the conformity of the obligation to provide information with Article 31(3) of Directive 92/96.

(see paras 28, 29, 34, 36, operative part 1, 2)

Case C‑51/13

Nationale-Nederlanden Levensverzekering Mij NV

v

Hubertus Wilhelmus Van Leeuwen

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Rotterdam)

‛Reference for a preliminary ruling — Direct life assurance — Directive 92/96/EEC — Article 31(3) — Information to be provided to the policyholder — Obligation for the insurer to provide further information on costs and premiums under general unwritten rules of national law’

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 29 April 2015

Freedom of movement for persons — Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Direct life assurance — Directive 92/96 — Information to be provided to the policyholder — General principles of domestic law requiring the policyholder to be provided with certain information additional to that referred to in Annex II to the directive — Lawfulness — Conditions — Determination by the national court — Consequences under national law of the failure to provide that additional information — No effect

(Council Directive 92/96, Art. 31(3))

Article 31(3) of Directive 92/96 on the coordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to direct life assurance and amending Directives 79/267 and 90/619 (third life assurance directive) must be interpreted as not precluding an insurance company, on the basis of general principles of domestic law such as ‘open and/or unwritten rules’, from being required to send to policyholders certain information additional to that listed in Annex II to that directive, provided that the information required is clear, accurate and necessary for the policyholder to understand the essential characteristics of the commitment and that it ensures a sufficient level of legal certainty, which it is for the referring court to ascertain.

The legal basis of such an obligation to provide additional information and particularly whether that obligation follows from general principles of domestic law such as the ‘open and/or unwritten rules’ is, in principle, irrelevant as regards its conformity with the directive, provided that that obligation meets the requirements of Article 31(3) of Directive 92/96. It follows therefrom that the legal basis for the use by the Member State concerned of the possibility provided for in Article 31(3) of that directive must be such that, in accordance with the principle of legal certainty, it enables insurance companies to identify with sufficient foreseeability what additional information they must provide and which the policyholder may expect.

The consequences under domestic law of a failure to provide that information are, in principle, irrelevant as regards the conformity of the obligation to provide information with Article 31(3) of Directive 92/96.

(see paras 28, 29, 34, 36, operative part 1, 2)