{"id":3041,"date":"2020-01-17T15:38:58","date_gmt":"2020-01-17T15:38:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.chirita-law.com\/?p=3041"},"modified":"2025-12-29T09:47:36","modified_gmt":"2025-12-29T07:47:36","slug":"decizie-cjue-invocare-caracter-abuziv-clauza-contestatie-executare","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/decizie-cjue-invocare-caracter-abuziv-clauza-contestatie-executare\/","title":{"rendered":"Decizie CJUE despre caracterul abuziv al unei clauze. Contesta\u0163ia la executare se poate introduce oric\u00e2nd"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a rel=\"noreferrer noopener\" href=\"https:\/\/curia.europa.eu\/jcms\/jcms\/j_6\/ro\/\" target=\"_blank\">Curtea de Justi\u021bie a Uniunii Europene<\/a> a pronun\u021bat recent o hot\u0103r\u00e2re ce vizeaz\u0103 prevalarea de caracterul abuziv al unei clauze, aceasta urm\u00e2nd s\u0103 aib\u0103 un impact semnificativ pentru procedurile de executare silit\u0103. Este vorba despre <a href=\"http:\/\/curia.europa.eu\/juris\/document\/document.jsf;jsessionid=C89CFD3A1B6FE3FE324A7330D1F1D16F?text=&amp;docid=220721&amp;pageIndex=0&amp;doclang=RO&amp;mode=lst&amp;dir=&amp;occ=first&amp;part=1&amp;cid=8063437\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">decizia din cauza C\u201175\/19<\/a>, M.F. \u00eempotriva BNP Paribas Personal Finance Paris SA Sucursala Bucure\u0219ti, Secapital S\u00e0rl. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Curtea a fost chemat\u0103 s\u0103 stabileasc\u0103 dac\u0103 <a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/RO\/TXT\/?uri=CELEX%3A31993L0013\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Directiva 93\/13\/CEE<\/a> trebuie interpretat\u0103 \u00een sensul c\u0103 se opune unei norme de drept na\u021bional \u00een temeiul c\u0103reia un consumator care a \u00eencheiat un contract de credit \u0219i \u00eempotriva c\u0103ruia s-a \u00eenceput o procedur\u0103 de executare silit\u0103 este dec\u0103zut din dreptul de a invoca existen\u021ba unor clauze abuzive pentru a contesta procedura men\u021bionat\u0103 dup\u0103 expirarea unui termen de 15 zile de la comunicarea primelor acte de executare.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Problema\ntran\u0219at\u0103 de Curte a pornit de la un litigiu \u00een leg\u0103tur\u0103 cu un\ncontract de credit \u00eencheiat \u00een 2008 \u00eentre M.F. cu institu\u021bia financiar\u0103 nebancar\u0103 Cetelem IFN Bucure\u0219ti, destinat\nfinan\u021b\u0103rii achizi\u021bion\u0103rii de bunuri de consum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Deoarece M.F. nu a rambursat ratele prev\u0103zute \u00een\ncontractul de credit \u00een cauz\u0103, Secapital, \u00een calitate de cesionar al\ncontractului de credit \u00een litigiu, a demarat procedurile de executare silit\u0103. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">M.F. a solicitat, prin intermediul unei contesta\u021bii la executare silit\u0103, \u00eenregistrate pe rolul Judec\u0103toriei T\u00e2rgu Mure\u0219, anularea tuturor actelor de\nexecutare \u0219i a execut\u0103rii silite \u00eens\u0103\u0219i, precum \u0219i a deciziei prin care s\u2011a \u00eencuviin\u021bat executarea silit\u0103, \u00eentruc\u00e2t\ndreptul de a cere executarea era prescris, ulterior solicit\u00e2nd instan\u021bei s\u0103 constate \u0219i nulitatea absolut\u0103 a titlului executoriu pe care\n\u00eel constituia contractul de credit, raportat la anumite clauze, care ar fi avut\nun caracter abuziv.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Secapital a invocat o excep\u021bie de inadmisibilitate \u00eentemeiat\u0103 pe caracterul tardiv al\ncontesta\u021biei la executarea silit\u0103.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Prima instan\u021b\u0103 a admis excep\u021bia tardivit\u0103\u021bii contesta\u021biei la executare \u0219i a respins, ca tardiv formulat\u0103, cererea contestatoarei, deoarece dispozi\u021biile Codului de procedur\u0103 civil\u0103 prev\u0103d un termen de 15 zile pentru\nintroducerea contesta\u021biei la executare.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Tribunalul specializat Mure\u0219, \u00eenvestit cu solu\u021bionarea apelului, a dispus\nsuspendarea cauzei \u0219i a\nadresat Cur\u021bii\ndou\u0103 \u00eentreb\u0103ri preliminare, prin care \u00een\nesen\u021b\u0103 a solicitat verificarea compatibilit\u0103\u021bii normelor europene cu\ninterpretarea instan\u021belor\nna\u021bionale prin care ar fi\ninadmisibil\u0103 constatarea caracterului abuziv al unor clauze din contractele de\ncredit \u00een procedura execut\u0103rii silite \u0219i totodat\u0103 asupra termenului de 15 zile\nimpus de legisla\u021bia\nna\u021bional\u0103 \u00een acest sens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u00cen aceast\u0103 materie, normele europene referitoare la protec\u021bia consumatorilor \u00eempotriva clauzelor abuzive sunt destul\nde stricte. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Astfel, prin\nDirectiva 93\/13\/CEE, la nivel european s-a impus statelor membre s\u0103 asigure un\nnivel c\u00e2t mai ridicat de protec\u021bie\nconsumatorilor, s\u0103 se asigure c\u0103 nu se includ clauze abuzive \u00een contractele\n\u00eencheiate de profe\u0219ioni\u0219ti cu consumatorii, dar \u0219i s\u0103 asigure\nmijloace eficiente \u0219i adecvate\npentru cenzurarea unor eventuale asemenea clauze \u0219i pentru prevenirea utiliz\u0103rii lor \u00een continuare.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Chiar mai mult, astfel cum a re\u021binut \u0219i Curtea \u00een argumentarea sa, pentru garantarea protec\u021biei efective a drepturilor care decurg din Directiva 93\/13, este necesar ca sistemul na\u021bional s\u0103 permit\u0103 un control din oficiu de c\u0103tre instan\u021b\u0103 al caracterului poten\u021bial abuziv al clauzelor cuprinse \u00een contractul \u00een cauz\u0103, acest aspect fiind re\u021binut \u0219i \u00een <a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/RO\/TXT\/?uri=CELEX:62014CA0049\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Hot\u0103r\u00e2rea din 18 februarie 2016, Finanmadrid EFC, C\u201149\/14<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Or, de\u0219i legisla\u021bia intern\u0103 prevede o ac\u021biune de drept comun,\nimprescriptibil\u0103, prin care consumatorul poate cere oric\u00e2nd constatarea existen\u021bei unor clauze abuzive \u0219i lipsirea lor de efecte, totu\u0219i este important de men\u021bionat c\u0103 solu\u021bia \u00een cadrul acestei proceduri nu\nproduce consecin\u021be\ndirecte asupra procedurii de executare silit\u0103, exist\u00e2nd riscul ca executarea silit\u0103 s\u0103 fie terminat\u0103 \u00eenainte de ob\u021binerea unei solu\u021bii \u00een cadrul procedurii de drept\ncomun.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Astfel c\u0103, cel mai important\nargument al Cur\u021bii se\nraporteaz\u0103 la situa\u021bia \u00een\ncare procedura de executare silit\u0103 ia sf\u00e2r\u0219it \u00eenaintea pronun\u021b\u0103rii deciziei instan\u021bei de fond prin care se\ndeclar\u0103 caracterul abuziv al clauzei contractuale aflate la originea execut\u0103rii\nsilite. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u00cen aceast\u0103 ipotez\u0103, Curtea re\u021bine c\u0103 aceast\u0103 decizie nu ar permite s\u0103 i se asigure consumatorului\nrespectiv dec\u00e2t o protec\u021bie&nbsp;ulterioar\u0103,&nbsp;de natur\u0103 financiar\u0103, care ar fi\nincomplet\u0103 \u0219i\ninsuficient\u0103 \u0219i nu\nar constitui un mijloc nici adecvat, nici eficient pentru a preveni utilizarea\nacestor clauze \u00een continuare.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Or, Curtea concluzioneaz\u0103 \u00een sensul c\u0103 o reglementare precum cea \u00een discu\u021bie genereaz\u0103 un risc semnificativ ca un consumatorul s\u0103 nu formuleze opozi\u021bie \u00een termenul strict de 15 zile de la comunicarea procedurii de executare silit\u0103 \u0219i, prin urmare, controlul de c\u0103tre o instan\u021b\u0103 al inexisten\u021bei unei clauze abuzive \u00een contractul vizat s\u0103 nu poat\u0103 fi efectuat \u2013 aspect re\u021binut \u0219i prin <a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/RO\/TXT\/?uri=CELEX:62017CA0448\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">Hot\u0103r\u00e2rea EOS KSI Slovensko, C\u2011448\/17<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">\u00cen consecin\u021b\u0103, prin raportare la aceste aspecte, analiz\u00e2nd\ncompatibilitatea normelor interne cu reglement\u0103rile Directivei europene\n93\/13\/CEE, C.J.U.E. a statuat c\u0103 norma intern\u0103 care limiteaz\u0103 la termenul de 15\nzile dreptului consumatorului de a invoca existen\u021ba unor clauze abuzive din contractul de credit \u00een\nprocedura execut\u0103rii silite nu este \u00een concordan\u021b\u0103 cu normele europene. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Pe cale de consecin<\/strong><strong>\u021b<\/strong><strong>\u0103, \u00een vederea garant\u0103rii protec<\/strong><strong>\u021b<\/strong><strong>iei efective a consumatorilor \u00een maniera impus\u0103 de\nnormele europene, executarea silita poate <\/strong><strong>\u0219<\/strong><strong>i chiar trebuie s\u0103 fie contestat\u0103 oric\u00e2nd, atunci c\u00e2nd motivul\nacesteia este reprezentat de caracterul abuziv al clauzelor contractului de\ncredit \u00een baza c\u0103ruia s-a demarat executarea silit\u0103. <\/strong><strong><\/strong><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Curtea de Justi\u021bie a Uniunii Europene a pronun\u021bat recent o hot\u0103r\u00e2re ce vizeaz\u0103 prevalarea de caracterul abuziv al unei clauze, aceasta urm\u00e2nd s\u0103 aib\u0103 un impact semnificativ pentru procedurile de executare silit\u0103. Este vorba despre decizia din cauza C\u201175\/19, M.F. \u00eempotriva BNP Paribas Personal Finance Paris SA Sucursala Bucure\u0219ti, Secapital S\u00e0rl. Curtea a fost chemat\u0103 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":4090,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[85,15],"tags":[121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129],"class_list":["post-3041","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-dreptul-uniunii-europene-reprezentare-in-fata-cjue","category-litigii-comerciale","tag-bunuri-de-consum","tag-cjue","tag-clauza-abuziva","tag-consumator","tag-contestare","tag-contract-de-credit","tag-drept-european","tag-litigiu","tag-protectia-consumatorilor"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3041","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3041"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3041\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4090"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3041"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3041"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/chirita-law.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3041"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}