Cofinoga (Environment and consumers) [2004] EUECJ C-264/02 (04 March 2004)

Cofinoga (Environment and consumers) [2004] EUECJ C-264/02 (04 March 2004)

The Directive does not require, before each renewal on existing terms and conditions of a credit agreement in the form of a credit facility linked to a credit card and repayable in monthly instalments at a variable interest rate, that the lender inform the borrower in writing of the current APR or the conditions under which it may be amended. Article 4 obligations apply only at the time the agreement is entered into, and Article 6 does not apply to such agreements.

Citation
[2004] EUECJ C-264/02
Parties
Claimant: Cofinoga Mérignac SA; Defendant: Mr Sachithanathan
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
04 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Ruling (article 234 Ec) / Reference From National Court (tribunal D'instance De Vienne)
Outcome
Preliminary ruling: Directive does not require lender to inform borrower of APR or its variation before each renewal on existing terms.
Legal Topics
Consumer Credit, Pre Contractual Information, Annual Percentage Rate (apr), Renewal of Credit Agreements, Interpretation of EU Directives
European Union Law Consumer Protection Law Contract Law Consumer Credit Pre Contractual Information Annual Percentage Rate (apr) Renewal of Credit Agreements Interpretation of EU Directives

Case Brief

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cofinoga Mérignac SA

Claimant

Mr Sachithanathan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Ruling (article 234 Ec) / Reference From National Court (tribunal D'instance De Vienne)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Council Directive 87/102/EEC as amended requires lenders to inform borrowers in writing of the current APR and conditions for its amendment before each renewal of a consumer credit agreement on existing terms and conditions.
  2. 2 Whether the Directive requires lenders to inform consumers of the clause concerning variation of the APR before each renewal.
  3. 3 Whether the Directive permits a plea of illegality regarding failure to state the APR to be raised without time-limit in payment actions.

Ratio Decidendi

The Directive does not require, before each renewal on existing terms and conditions of a credit agreement in the form of a credit facility linked to a credit card and repayable in monthly instalments at a variable interest rate, that the lender inform the borrower in writing of the current APR or the conditions under which it may be amended. Article 4 obligations apply only at the time the agreement is entered into, and Article 6 does not apply to such agreements.

Court Disposition

Preliminary ruling: Directive does not require lender to inform borrower of APR or its variation before each renewal on existing terms.