Band 19, Heft 3

Directive 93/13/ECC does not regulate prescription periods. However, some parameters can be drawn from the effectiveness principle that national legislation must consider in order to comply with Directive 93/13. This paper argues that the commencement of prescription for restitutionary claims following the unfairness of a term within the Directive 93/13 is determined with a reasonable discoverability criterion concerning the unfairness of the term. A consumer is able to discover the unfairness from the moment when a litigation context concerning the term in question arises. The commencement of prescription cannot be postponed until a court of last resort has decided over the issue on the unfairness.182

This article explores the interplay between international arbitration and data subject compensation claims under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The analysis focuses on the validity and enforcement of arbitration agreements and the resulting awards. The article argues that despite potential skepticism, arbitration can offer significant benefits to data subjects, and that compensation claims under the GDPR should be considered arbitrable under the New York Convention and CJEU case law. The article further argues that EU courts have a duty to refer disputes to arbitration, and that the mandatory provisions of EU law have limited means of interfering with this duty. Furthermore, it establishes that the misapplication of GDPR provisions does not automatically justify the denial of arbitral award recognition. The article argues that this is a natural extension of trust traditionally shown to arbitrators, and that such trust should not be easily cast aside.

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.

This article provides an overview of the most relevant cases decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning contract law. The present issue covers the period between the beginning of April 2023 and the end of June 2023. Out of a total of 155 judgments decided in this period, 55 had a contract law dimension.