Jurisprudence

  • Informations concernant l’affaire
    • ID national: Court of Cassation, Judgement of 05/12/2013
    • État membre: Luxembourg
    • Nom commun:N/A
    • Type de décision: Décision de la Cour suprême
    • Date de la décision: 05/12/2013
    • Juridiction: Cour de Cassation
    • Objet:
    • Demandeur: X - Y
    • Défendeur: Soc1 SA
    • Mots clés: case law, consumer, unfair terms
  • Articles de la directive
    Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 3, 2. Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 3, 2.
  • Note introductive
    The fact that a contract is concluded before a notary removes the qualification of membership contract.

  • Faits
    According to the contested judgment, the Tribunal d'arrondissement of Luxembourg had declared unfounded the plaintiff's application for the annulment of the clause laid down in the act of opening of credit which they had concluded with the limited company the defendant and had authorized on the basis of article 71 of the Act of 2 January 1889 on the seizure of immovable property, the continuation of the prosecution of the immoveables more fully specified in the operative part of the judgment. On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the judgment.
  • Question juridique
    Does the fact that a contract is concluded before a notary remove the qualification of membership contract?
  • Décision
  • Affaires liées

    Aucun résultat disponible

  • Doctrine

    Aucun résultat disponible

  • Résultat
    By holding that the contract concluded by a notarial deed does not constitute a membership contract within the meaning of the relevant standards and that it does not fall within their scope, the appellate judges have correctly applied these provisions . The plea is therefore unfounded.