header-logo header-logo

18 September 2015
Issue: 7668 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

EU

Costea v SC Volksbank Romania SA; C-110/14 , [2015] All ER (D) 29 (Sep)

The Court of Justice of the European Union held that, Art 2(b) of Council Directive (EEC) 93/13 had to be interpreted as meaning that a natural person who practised as a lawyer and concluded a credit agreement with a bank, in which the purpose of the credit was not specified, might be regarded as a “consumer” within the meaning of that provision, where that agreement was not linked to that lawyer’s profession. The fact that the debt that arose out of the same contract was secured by a mortgage taken out by that person in his capacity as representative of his law firm and involved goods intended for the exercise of that person’s profession, such as a building that belonged to that firm, was not relevant in that regard.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Test Article Upgrade

Test Article Upgrade

"Neque porro quisquam est qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit...""There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."

Gateley Legal—Jack Kelly

Gateley Legal—Jack Kelly

Gateley Legal expands Midlands residential development team

Gibson Dunn—Richard Surtees

Gibson Dunn—Richard Surtees

Gibson Dunn adds employee benefits and executive compensation practice in London with partner Richard Surtees

NEWS

Family lawyers cite financial disincentives for issuing child protection orders

A series of recent decisions has clarified important principles across property law, from perpetuities to lease renewals and public rights over land
A series of recent decisions has clarified important principles across property law, from perpetuities to lease renewals and public rights over land
Employers cannot rely on wellbeing services alone to defend workplace stress claims after a High Court decision awarding almost £1m to an overworked employee
back-to-top-scroll