Case C-582/23, Wiszkier: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 3 July 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla Łodzi-Śródmieścia w Łodzi – Poland) – R.S. (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Directive 93/13/EEC – Unfair terms in consumer contracts – Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) – Powers and obligations of the national court – Insolvency proceedings relating to a natural person – Bankruptcy court has no power to examine ex officio whether the terms of a contract that gave rise to a claim on the list of claims are unfair – No power for that court to order interim measures – Principle of effectiveness)
Date: 2025-07-03
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: claim, consumer protection, financial solvency, judicial review, unfair terms of contract








C_202504551EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/4551


25.8.2025






Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 3 July 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla Łodzi-Śródmieścia w Łodzi – Poland) – R.S.


(Case C-582/23,
                (1)
Wiszkier
                (2)
)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) - Powers and obligations of the national court - Insolvency proceedings relating to a natural person - Bankruptcy court has no power to examine 
ex officio
 whether the terms of a contract that gave rise to a claim on the list of claims are unfair - No power for that court to order interim measures - Principle of effectiveness)
(C/2025/4551)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy dla Łodzi-Śródmieścia w Łodzi

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: R.S.

Other parties: G. S.A., P.C., acting as trustee in bankruptcy of R.S. and of M.S., M.K., acting as liquidator of G. S.A., J.J., M.G.

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, read in the light of the principle of effectiveness,
must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which provides that, in insolvency proceedings relating to natural persons, once the list of claims has been approved by a judicial authority, which has not examined the possible unfairness of the terms of the contract concerned, and proceedings have been commenced before the bankruptcy court, the latter is bound by that list, with the effect that it can neither assess the unfairness of terms contained in a loan agreement on which a claim included on that list is based nor amend that list, but must stay the proceedings and refer the matter of the possible unfairness of those terms to the judicial authority in question.










2.


Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) of Directive 93/13, read in the light of the principle of effectiveness,
must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which, in the context of insolvency proceedings relating to natural persons, does not provide that the bankruptcy court can order interim measures to regulate the situation of the bankrupt pending a decision concluding examination of the unfairness of the terms in a loan agreement, where that agreement has given rise to a claim included on the list of claims approved by a different judicial authority, which has not examined the possible unfairness of the terms of the contract concerned.






(1)  OJ C, C/2024/406.

(2)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any of the parties to the proceedings.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4551/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)