Official Journal of the European Union
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Paris (France) lodged on 25 January 2022 — SOGEFINANCEMENT v RW, UV
Language of the case: French
Cour d’appel de Paris
Parties to the main proceedings
Defendants: RW, UV
Does the principle that penalties must be effective, deriving from Article 23 of Directive 2008/48/EC, (1) in the light of the principles of legal certainty and of States’ procedural autonomy, preclude a situation whereby a court may not raise of its own motion a national legal provision, resulting from Article 14 of that directive and penalised under national law by the nullity of the agreement, beyond the five-year limitation period within which the consumer may seek the annulment of the credit agreement by bringing legal proceedings or by raising an objection?
Does the principle that penalties must be effective, deriving from Article 23 of Directive 2008/48/EC, in the light of the principles of legal certainty and of States’ procedural autonomy and the principle that the subject matter of an action is delimited by the parties, preclude a situation whereby a court may not declare a credit agreement null and void after raising of its own motion a provision of national law, resulting from Article 14 of that directive, where the consumer has not applied for or at least acquiesced in such annulment?
(1) Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC (OJ 2008 L 133, p. 66).