Case C-498/25, Abelardo: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n.o 1 de Córdoba (Spain) lodged on 4 July 2025 – Abelardo v Agencia Estatal de la Administración Tributaria
Date: 2025-07-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: case-law (EU), debt, financial solvency, principle of proportionality








C_202505435EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5435


20.10.2025






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n.o 1 de Córdoba (Spain) lodged on 4 July 2025 – Abelardo v Agencia Estatal de la Administración Tributaria


(Case C-498/25, Abelardo
                (1)
)

(C/2025/5435)
Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil n.o 1 de Córdoba

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Abelardo

Defendant: Agencia Estatal de la Administración Tributaria

Questions referred







1.


Must the proportionality test to which the case-law of the Court of Justice refers and which is inherent in the application of any EU legislation by a national court be applied in accordance with the objective of the EU legislation (in this case Directive 2019/1023 (2) and the objective of offering a system for a full discharge of debt to honest debtors who have acted in good faith) or must it be applied, where relevant, in accordance with the objective of the transposing legislation (in this case Law 16/2022 (3) and, in relation to the exceptions to and restrictions on the discharge of debt relating to claims governed by public law, the objective of the payment such debt)?










2.


Whatever test is to be applied on the basis of the response to the first question, are the rules laid down in the current Article 487(1)(2) of the [Texto Refundido Ley Concursal] TRLC, which prevent the discharge of debt of any kind in the case of debtors who do not, within the time limits established in that provision, pay penalties issued for the reasons and in the periods stated in Article 487(1)(2) of the TRLC, consistent with the principle of proportionality?










3.


Whatever test is to be applied on the basis of the response to the first question, is a provision such as Article 487(1)(2) of the TRLC, which sets a time limit for payment of the penalty in order to have access to discharge, without the debtor being permitted to pay that penalty prior to the conclusion of the judicial discharge procedure, consistent with the principle of proportionality?










4.


Whatever test is to be applied on the basis of the response to the first question, is a provision such as Article 487(1)(2) of the TRLC, which prevents access to discharge in the case of non-payment of penalties the amount of which is lower than the sum which the legislature itself allows to be discharged, consistent with the principle of proportionality?










5.


Are provisions such as Article 487(1)(2) and Article 489(1)(5) of the TRLC, which, in both cases, impose partial payment of the debt on the debtor, without allowing the national court to examine the particular personal circumstances of the debtor, consistent with the principle of proportionality and with Article 20(2) of Directive 2019/1023?










6.


Are national provisions such as Article 487(1)(2) and Article 489(1)(5) of the TRLC, which, while the objective of the legislation is to offer an honest debtor who has acted in good faith a full discharge of debt, in cases in which it is established by the national court, during the discharge procedure, that the debtor, when applying for the discharge, no longer has assets of any kind with which he or she could pay any kind of debt, prevent or limit the discharge of debt relating to claims governed by public law, consistent with the principle of proportionality?










7.


Are national provisions such as Article 487(1)(2) and Article 489(1)(5) of the TRLC, which, while the objective of the legislation is the payment of debt relating to claims governed by public law, in cases in which it is established by the national court, during the discharge procedure, that the debtor, when applying for the discharge, no longer has assets of any kind with which he or she could pay any kind of debt, prevent or limit the discharge of debt relating to claims governed by public law, consistent with the principle of proportionality?






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

(2)  Directive (EU) 2019/1023 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on preventive restructuring frameworks, on discharge of debt and disqualifications, and on measures to increase the efficiency of procedures concerning restructuring, insolvency and discharge of debt, and amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132, OJ L 172, 26.6.2019, pp. 18-55.

(3)  Spanish Official Journal (BOE) No 214 of 6.9.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5435/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)