The average consumer is not a lawyer! Case C-66/19 JC v Kreissparkasse Saarlouis
| DOI | 10.1177/1023263X20938989 |
| Published date | 01 June 2020 |
| Author | Peter Rott |
| Date | 01 June 2020 |
| Subject Matter | Case Notes |
Case Note
The average consumer
is not a lawyer!Case C-66/19
JC v Kreissparkasse Saarlouis
Peter Rott*
Abstract
The Court of Justice had to decide on the transparency of information on the right of withdrawal in
consumer credit law. Under German law, the creditor could describe the start of the withdrawal
period by mere reference to a legal provision which then referred to other legal provisions which
the consumer then had to interpret, which the Court of Justice considered to be lacking in
transparency. In the background, there was a conflict between the referring court and the German
Federal Supreme Court on the legal competence of the average consumer that the Court of Justice
decided in favour of the referring court.
Keywords
Consumer credit, right of withdrawal, clear and concise information, reference to legal provisions
1. Introduction
The case of Kreissparkasse Saarlouis turns on the transparency requirements of the information on
the right of withdrawal under EU consumer credit law. Its relevance for German consumer credit
law can only be fully appreciated in the light of German legislative history and case law, which this
case note therefore elaborates on first before it analyses the brief and clear-cut decision of the
Court of Justice. The case also underlines the Court’s general approach to the expectations that
national courts should have in relation to the legal skills of average consumers, and therefore on the
transparency of information or contract terms that are expressed in legal terms.
* Visiting Professor and Marcel Storme Chair for International and Comparative Civil Procedure (2019-2020), University of
Gent, Belgium
Corresponding author:
Peter Rott, Visiting Professor and Marcel Storme Chair for International and Comparative Civil Procedure (2019-2020),
University of Gent, Belgium.
E-mail: rott@uni-kassel.de
Maastricht Journal of European and
Comparative Law
2020, Vol. 27(3) 379–386
ªThe Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1023263X20938989
maastrichtjournal.sagepub.com
MJ
MJ
To continue reading
Request your trial