CELEX: 62019CA0738
Language: en
Date: 2020-09-10 00:00:00
Title: Case C-738/19: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 September 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam — Netherlands) — A v B, C (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Consumer protection — Directive 93/13/EEC — Annex, point 1(e) — Unfair terms in consumer contracts — Social housing — Obligation of residence and prohibition on subletting the property — Article 3(1) and (3) — Article 4(1) — Assessment of whether penalty clauses are unfair — Criteria)

16.11.2020   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 390/16
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 September 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam — Netherlands) — A v B, C
      (Case C-738/19) (1)
      
      (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive 93/13/EEC - Annex, point 1(e) - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Social housing - Obligation of residence and prohibition on subletting the property - Article 3(1) and (3) - Article 4(1) - Assessment of whether penalty clauses are unfair - Criteria)
      (2020/C 390/22)
      Language of the case: Dutch
      
         Referring court
      
      Rechtbank Amsterdam
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicant: A
      
         Defendants: B, C
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      Article 3(1) and (3) and Article 4(1) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as meaning that, where a national court examines whether a term in a consumer contract is unfair, within the meaning of those provisions, it must take account, among the terms which fall within the scope of that directive, of the degree of interaction between the term at issue and other terms, having regard, inter alia, to their respective scope. In order to assess whether the amount of the penalty imposed on the consumer is disproportionately high, within the meaning of point 1(e) of the annex to that directive, significant weight must be attached to those terms which relate to the same breach.
      
         (1)  OJ C 19, 20.1.2020.