Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 6, 1.

In this case, the Court is to evaluate in which cases and at what stage of the procedure it must conduct an ex officio determination of unfair contract terms.

The enforcement debtor filed an appeal against the ruling by which his motion for suspension of enforcement was rejected. An enforcement procedure was initiated against the enforcement debtor based on the enforcement document- an authenticated private document which contains a credit agreement and a corresponding security agreement, and regarding which the court did not have an opportunity to determine whether it contains the unfair contractual terms which the enforcement debtor invokes.

At which point should the court of its own motion (ex officio) determine whether the unfair contractual terms exist in the credit agreement which was authenticated before the notary public?

Enforcement debtors are entitled to file a motion for suspension of the enforcement until the court in civil proceedings adopts a decision regarding the existence of the unfair contractual terms in the credit agreement, based on which agreement the enforcement agreement was initiated. By providing such an opinion, the court accepts the opinion of the European Court expressed in case Kuhar c/a Addiko Bank d.d., C-407/18.

Cjeloviti tekst: Cjeloviti tekst

Nema dostupnih rezultata

Nema dostupnih rezultata

Awareness of the decision adopted in case Kuhar c/a Addiko Bank d.d., C-407/18 is raised due to a similarity between the Slovenian and Croatian legal system in relation to the enforcement procedure and determination of nullity of the unfair contractual terms. That is particularly important in situations where the enforcement document is also a notarial act or an authenticated private document.