Falucka (Consumer protection - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Actions for restitution - Judgment) [2026] EUECJ C-901/24 (16 April 2026)

Falucka (Consumer protection - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Actions for restitution - Judgment) [2026] EUECJ C-901/24 (16 April 2026)

Article 7(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC and the principle of effectiveness, in light of the right of access to a court and the principles of proportionality and legal certainty, do not preclude a national rule under which the limitation period for a seller or supplier's claim is interrupted by a consumer's declaration,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] EUECJ C-901/24
Parties
Applicant: mBank S. A.; Respondent: TK; Respondent: DJ; Respondent: JJ
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
16 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Ruling / Reference From National Court (sąd Okręgowy W Warszawie) to Court of Justice of the European Union
Outcome
Reference answered; Article 7(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC does not preclude the national rule described.
Legal Topics
Unfair Contract Terms, Limitation Periods, Consumer Contracts, Mortgage Loans, Restitution, Effectiveness of EU Law, Proportionality, Legal Certainty, Right of Access to a Court
European Union Law Consumer Protection Contract Law Unfair Contract Terms Limitation Periods Consumer Contracts Mortgage Loans Restitution +4 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

mBank S. A.

Applicant

TK

Respondent

DJ

Respondent

JJ

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Ruling / Reference From National Court (sąd Okręgowy W Warszawie) to Court of Justice of the European Union

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article 7(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC and the principles of effectiveness, proportionality, legal certainty, and access to a court preclude a national rule that allows interruption of the limitation period for a seller or supplier's claim by a consumer's declaration acknowledging repayment obligation after contract invalidation due to unfair terms.

Ratio Decidendi

Article 7(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC and the principle of effectiveness, in light of the right of access to a court and the principles of proportionality and legal certainty, do not preclude a national rule under which the limitation period for a seller or supplier's claim is interrupted by a consumer's declaration, made in the context of proceedings for invalidation of a loan agreement containing unfair terms, that the consumer is aware of and accepts the obligation to repay sums received as a result of such invalidation.

Court Disposition

Reference answered; Article 7(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC does not preclude the national rule described.

Orders

  • Article 7(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC and the principle of effectiveness, having regard to the right of access to a court and the principles of proportionality and legal certainty, must be interpreted as not precluding a judicial interpretation of national legislation according to which the limitation period for a...