CELEX: 62016CN0186
Language: en
Date: 2016-04-01 00:00:00
Title: Case C-186/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Oradea (Romania) lodged on 1 April 2016 — Ruxandra-Paula Andriciuc and Others v Banca Românească SA

4.7.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 243/16
            
         Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Oradea (Romania) lodged on 1 April 2016 — Ruxandra-Paula Andriciuc and Others v Banca Românească SA
   (Case C-186/16)
   (2016/C 243/17)
   Language of the case: Romanian
   
      Referring court
   
   Curtea de Apel Oradea
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicants: Ruxandra-Paula Andriciuc and Others
   
      Defendant: Banca Românească SA
   
      Questions referred
   
   
               1.
            
            
               Must Article 3(1) of Directive 93/13 (1) be interpreted as meaning that the significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations arising from the contract must be evaluated strictly by reference to the time when the contract was concluded or does that imbalance also extend to the case where, during the performance of the contract, whether it is performed at regular intervals or continuously, performance by the consumer has become excessively burdensome in comparison with the time when the contract was concluded because of significant variations in the exchange rate?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Must the plainness and intelligibility of a contractual term, within the meaning of Article 4(2) of Directive 93/13, be understood to mean that that term must provide not only for the grounds of its incorporation in the contract and the term’s method of operation, or must it also provide for all the possible consequences of the term as a result of which the price paid by the consumer may vary, for example, foreign exchange risk, and in the light of Directive 93/13/EEC may it be considered that the bank’s obligation to inform the customer at the time of granting the credit relates solely to the conditions of credit, namely, the interest, commissions, and guarantees required of the borrower, since such an obligation may not include the possible overvaluation or undervaluation of a foreign currency?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Must Article 4(2) of Directive 93/13 EEC be interpreted as meaning that the expressions ‘the main subject matter of the contract’ and ‘adequacy of the price and remuneration, on the one hand, as against the services or goods supplie[d] in exchange, on the other’ include a term incorporated in a credit agreement entered into in a foreign currency concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer, which has not been negotiated individually, pursuant to which ‘the credit must be repaid in the same currency’?
            
         
      (1)  Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29).