CELEX: 62020CN0657
Language: en
Date: 2020-12-04 00:00:00
Title: Case C-657/20: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 1 de Cazalla de la Sierra (Spain) lodged on 4 December 2020 — Caixabank, S.A. v ZN, SD, AH

15.3.2021   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 88/13
            
         
      Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 1 de Cazalla de la Sierra (Spain) lodged on 4 December 2020 — Caixabank, S.A. v ZN, SD, AH
      (Case C-657/20)
      (2021/C 88/17)
      Language of the case: Spanish
      
         Referring court
      
      Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 1 de Cazalla de la Sierra
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicant: Caixabank, S.A.
      
         Defendants: ZN, SD, AH
      
         Questions referred
      
      Having regard to the rights set out in DIRECTIVE 93/13 (1) and the criteria laid down by the judgments of the European Court of Justice of 14 March 2013 and of 26 March 2019, which establish that non-performance of the payment obligation must be sufficiently serious in the light of the term and amount of the loan in order for the accelerated repayment clause to apply, the following question is referred:
      Is it necessary for non-performance of the payment obligation to be sufficiently serious in respect of both the amount and the term of the loan simultaneously, or does it suffice for it to be sufficiently serious in respect of only one of those criteria?
      If regard must be had to both criteria (term and amount of the loan), and both criteria must be satisfied and assessed jointly, this raises questions as to whether national legislation (Article 24 of Law 5/19) and national case-law (judgment of the Tribunal Supremo (Supreme Court) No 463/19) require both criteria to be weighed.
      If both criteria (term and amount of the loan) must be satisfied and assessed jointly, this raises questions as to how to resolve cases where there is serious non-compliance only with regard to the amount of the loan as provided for in Article 24 of Law 5/19, on grounds of non-payment of 3 % of the principal sum, but there is no serious non-compliance as regards the term of the loan as provided for by the only temporal references in Article 24 of Law 5/19, in that fewer than 12 repayment instalments had been missed.
      
         (1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).