CELEX: 62018CN0779
Language: en
Date: 2018-12-12 00:00:00
Title: Case C-779/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Siemianowicach Śląskich (Poland) lodged on 12 December 2018 — Mikrokasa SA, Gdynia, and Revenue Niestandaryzowany Sekurytyzacyjny Fundusz Inwestycyjny Zamknięty, Warsaw v XO

13.5.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 164/4
            
         
      Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Siemianowicach Śląskich (Poland) lodged on 12 December 2018 — Mikrokasa SA, Gdynia, and Revenue Niestandaryzowany Sekurytyzacyjny Fundusz Inwestycyjny Zamknięty, Warsaw v XO
      (Case C-779/18)
      (2019/C 164/05)
      Language of the case: Polish
      
         Referring court
      
      Sąd Rejonowy w Siemianowicach Śląskich
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicants: Mikrokasa SA, Gdynia, and Revenue Niestandaryzowany Sekurytyzacyjny Fundusz Inwestycyjny Zamknięty, Warsaw
      
         Defendant: XO
      
         Questions referred
      
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Should the provisions of Directive 2008/48/EC of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC, as amended, (1) in particular Articles 3(g), 10(1) and 22(1) thereof, be interpreted as precluding ‘non-interest credit costs’, determined as a lump sum in accordance with the statutory calculation formula set out in Article 36a of the ustawa z dnia 12 maja 2011 r. o kredycie konsumenckim (Dziennik Ustaw z 2018 r., poz. 993, tekst jednolity) (Law of 12 May 2011 on Consumer Credit) (Journal of Laws of 2018, item 993, consolidated text) (the Law on Consumer Credit), from being distinguished from the ‘total cost of the credit to the consumer’, as defined in that directive, in a manner that enables the actual non-interest credit costs borne by the loan provider to be concealed from the consumer?
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Should the provisions of Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, as amended, (2) in particular Articles 1(2), 6(1) and 7(1) thereof, be interpreted as precluding a review of the terms of consumer credit agreements with respect to the conditions set out in Article 3 of that directive in so far as it includes ‘non-interest credit costs’, the criteria for determining which are described in Article 36a of the Law on Consumer Credit?
               
            
         (1)  OJ 2008 L 133, p. 66.
      
         (2)  OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29.