Case C-746/24, Gryczara: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 27 November 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie – Poland) – Bank Millennium SA v PR (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Directive 93/13/EEC – Unfair terms in consumer contracts – Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) – Effects of a finding that a term is unfair – Invalidity of the contract – Action brought by a seller or supplier for restitution of the loan capital paid under an agreement declared invalid – Rules on the award of costs – Different methods of calculating court costs according to the status of the applicant – Principle of effectiveness – Obligation to interpret national law in conformity with EU law)
Date: 2025-11-27
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: claim, consumer credit, consumer protection, legal expenses, unfair terms of contract








C_202600432EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2026/432


2.2.2026






Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 27 November 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie – Poland) – Bank Millennium SA v PR


(Case C-746/24,
                (1)
Gryczara
                (2)
)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Article 6(1) and Article 7(1) - Effects of a finding that a term is unfair - Invalidity of the contract - Action brought by a seller or supplier for restitution of the loan capital paid under an agreement declared invalid - Rules on the award of costs - Different methods of calculating court costs according to the status of the applicant - Principle of effectiveness - Obligation to interpret national law in conformity with EU law)
(C/2026/432)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Bank Millennium SA

Defendant: PR

Operative part of the judgment

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 allows a consumer, as the defendant who has been unsuccessful in an action brought by a seller or supplier for repayment of the loan capital following the annulment of a loan agreement on account of the unfairness of terms contained therein, to be ordered to pay the costs including court costs which, as a result of the distinction made by that legislation in the calculation of the amount of those costs according to whether the applicant is a consumer, significantly exceed those which that consumer would have had to bear if he or she had been unsuccessful in an action brought by him or her seeking a declaration that those terms are unfair and, as the case may be, a declaration of the invalidity of those terms and of the loan agreement.


(1)  OJ C, C/2025/530.

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


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2026/432/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)