Skip to content
Home
About
Posts
Case Law Reports
Home
About
Posts
Case Law Reports
Cross-border Debt Recovery Blog by Marco Sposini

Cross-border Debt Recovery Blog

by Marco Sposini

Laywer, Milan Bar Association

Worldwide debt recovery news


The Court of Justice on jurisdiction and law applicable to consumer contracts under Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 and Regulation (EC) No 593/2008

15 September 2023

The Court of Justice of the European Union, by judgment ECLI:EU:C:2023:672, dated 14 September 2023, in Case C-821/21 – in proceedings between NM, on the one hand, and Club La Costa (UK) plc, sucursal en España, CLC Resort Management Ltd, Midmark 2 Ltd, CLC Resort Development Ltd and European Resorts & Hotels SL, on the other, concerning an application for a declaration that a timeshare contract was void and for an order for payment of a sum by way of restitution – ruled that:

1. Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that the expression ‘other party to a contract’, in that provision, must be understood as referring only to the natural or legal person who is a party to the contract in question and not to other persons, not parties to that contract, even if they are connected with that person.

2. Article 63(1) and (2) of Regulation No 1215/2012 must be interpreted as meaning that the determination, in accordance with that provision, of the domicile of the ‘other party to a contract’, within the meaning of Article 18(1) of that regulation, does not constitute a limitation of the choice which the consumer may make under that Article 18(1). In that regard, the clarifications provided in Article 63(2) concerning the concept of ‘statutory seat’ constitute autonomous definitions.

3. Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I) must be interpreted as not precluding a choice-of-law clause in the general terms and conditions of a contract or in a separate document to which that contract refers and which has been provided to the consumer, provided that that clause informs the consumer that he or she enjoys, in any event, under Article 6(2) of that regulation, the protection afforded to him or her by the mandatory provisions of the law of the country in which he or she has his or her habitual residence.

4. Article 6(1) of Regulation No 593/2008 must be interpreted as meaning that where a consumer contract fulfils the requirements set out in that provision and in the absence of a valid choice of law applicable to that contract, that law must be determined in accordance with that provision, which may be relied on by both parties to that contract, including the professional, notwithstanding the fact that the law applicable to the contract in accordance with Articles 3 and 4 of that regulation may be more favourable to the consumer.

The text is available here


Post navigation

Previous Previous
The Court of Justice on Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 (Rome I) in consumer contracts
NextContinue
Article on the 2019 Hague Convention in the United States

Disclaimer

This blog is my private project and represents only my personal views and opinions. It is not supported, sponsored or endorsed by my law firm, Studio Legale Sardo, or any other third party. This blog is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Using the blog and contacting me through this website does not make the user my client. This blog does not provide legal advice but only general information and is not intended as a substitute for competent legal advice by a qualified lawyer in your jurisdiction.

© 2023-2026 Cross-border Debt Recovery Blog by Marco Sposini. All Rights Reserved

VAT Number IT13173280150

info@crossborderdebtrecoveryblog.com

Cookie Policy    Privacy Policy

Scroll to top