Case C-337/23, APS Beta Bulgaria and Agentsia za kontrol na prosrocheni zadalzhenia: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 13 March 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad – Bulgaria) – APS Beta Bulgaria EOOD, Agentsia za kontrol na prosrocheni zadalzhenia AD (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Directive 93/13/EEC – Unfair terms in consumer contracts – Article 4(2), Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) – Point 1(i), (j) and (m) of the Annex to Directive 93/13 – Consumer credit agreements – Term requiring a consumer to conclude a contract of guarantee – Guarantor chosen by the creditor – Exclusion of terms relating to the main subject matter of the contract – Agreement which is ancillary to a credit agreement – Powers of the national court – Order for payment procedure – Directive 2005/29/EC – Unfair commercial practices – Articles 5 and 8 – Annex I – Directive 2008/48/EC – Article 3(g), (i) and (n), Article 10(2), Article 15(2) and Article 23 – Linked credit agreement – Concept – Total cost of the credit to the consumer – Annual percentage rate of charge – No indication of the relevant costs – Penalty)
Date: 2025-03-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: civil proceedings, consumer credit, consumer protection, guarantee, injunction, insurance, restriction on competition, trade licence, unfair terms of contract








C_202502496EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/2496


12.5.2025






Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 13 March 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski rayonen sad – Bulgaria) – APS Beta Bulgaria EOOD, Agentsia za kontrol na prosrocheni zadalzhenia AD


(Case C-337/23,
                (1)
APS Beta Bulgaria and Agentsia za kontrol na prosrocheni zadalzhenia)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Article 4(2), Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) - Point 1(i), (j) and (m) of the Annex to Directive 93/13 - Consumer credit agreements - Term requiring a consumer to conclude a contract of guarantee - Guarantor chosen by the creditor - Exclusion of terms relating to the main subject matter of the contract - Agreement which is ancillary to a credit agreement - Powers of the national court - Order for payment procedure - Directive 2005/29/EC - Unfair commercial practices - Articles 5 and 8 - Annex I - Directive 2008/48/EC - Article 3(g), (i) and (n), Article 10(2), Article 15(2) and Article 23 - Linked credit agreement - Concept - Total cost of the credit to the consumer - Annual percentage rate of charge - No indication of the relevant costs - Penalty)
(C/2025/2496)
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Sofiyski rayonen sad

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants in the order for payment procedures: APS Beta Bulgaria EOOD, Agentsia za kontrol na prosrocheni zadalzhenia AD

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 4(2) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts
must be interpreted as not precluding the assessment of the potentially unfair nature of the terms of a contract which determine the obligations of the guarantor and the debtor in the main proceedings, in a situation where the debtor has concluded that contract at the same time as the credit agreement and in order to comply with an obligation laid down in the credit agreement, where the guarantor is a subsidiary of the creditor or a person chosen by the creditor and where the costs of the guarantee are payable at the same time as the loan instalments.










2.


Point 1(i), (j) and (m) of the Annex to Directive 93/13
must be interpreted as meaning that a term by which a consumer undertakes, in the context of a credit agreement, to conclude a contract of guarantee with a guarantor chosen by the lender, without being aware, when the credit agreement is concluded, of the identity of the guarantor or of the content of the terms of that contract of guarantee, does not fall within one of those provisions.










3.


Article 8 of 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’), read in conjunction with Article 5(5) of that directive and Annex I thereto,
must be interpreted as meaning that the inclusion in credit agreements of a term by which the consumer must conclude a contract of guarantee with a person chosen by the lender does not constitute an aggressive commercial practice in all circumstances.










4.


Article 6(1) of Directive 93/13
must be interpreted as meaning that a national court, hearing an application for an order for payment in the context of proceedings in which the debtor-consumer does not participate, may not disapply ex officio a term of the consumer credit agreement concluded between that consumer and the seller or supplier concerned, if it is not convinced that that term must be classified as ‘unfair’ within the meaning of Article 3(1) of that directive. The existence of a doubt that that term may have been accepted by the consumer as a result of an unfair commercial practice, within the meaning of Article 5 of Directive 2005/29, may, however, constitute one factor, among others, which may be taken into consideration for the purposes of assessing the potentially unfair nature of the term at issue.










5.


The concept of ‘linked credit agreement’, within the meaning of Article 3(n) 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
must be interpreted as meaning that a credit agreement, the conclusion of which is linked solely to the conclusion of a contract of guarantee with a third party in return for a fee, does not fall within that scope.










6.


Article 3(g) and (i) of Directive 2008/48
must be interpreted as meaning that the costs relating to a contract of guarantee the conclusion of which is imposed on the consumer by a term in a credit agreement which he or she has taken out, which result in an increase in the total amount of the debt, fall within the concept of ‘total cost of the credit to the consumer’ and, consequently, within the concept of the ‘annual percentage rate of charge’.










7.


Article 10(2)(g) and Article 23 of Directive 2008/48
must be interpreted as not precluding a consumer credit agreement from being deemed to be free of interest and charges where that agreement does not specify an annual percentage rate of charge that includes all of the costs provided for in Article 3(g) of that directive, with the result that its annulment entails only the repayment, by the consumer concerned, of the principal amount loaned.






(1)  
            OJ C 321, 11.9.2023.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2496/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)