| 10.5.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 191/12 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Paris (France) lodged on 25 January 2022 — SOGEFINANCEMENT v RW, UV
(Case C-50/22)
(2022/C 191/16)
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Cour d’appel de Paris
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: SOGEFINANCEMENT
Defendants: RW, UV
Questions referred
| 1. | 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? |
| 2. | 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).