English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The article refers to the problem of Statute of limitations for restitution claims after a term is declared unfair in light of the ECJ judgment of 8th of September 2022 (Joined Cases C-80/21 to C-82/21). In light of the ECJ judgment one may not argue that if there was a sanction that would deprive a consumer effective claim for restitution because of excessive effect of statute of limitation, such mechanism would be contrary to the aim of protection under Directive 93/13. The regulation contained in Directive 93/13 should not allow for 10‑year limitation period for a consumer’s action for the restitution of the payments made under 30-years lasting bank loan contract if the limitation period passed before the consumers claim has been payable. The ECJ judgment might be perceived as somewhat superfluous, because such an effect would also be difficult to accept that in the light of the principles of the civil law – certainly Polish law, which should give a ground for the assumption provided in the question submitted by the referring court. However, the ECJ ruling itself does not seem to be controversial.

european review of contract law

Statute of Limitations for Restitution Claims after a Term is Declared Unfair. Some Remarks on the CJEU Judgment of 8th of September 2022 (Joined Cases C-80/21 to C-82/21)