Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
Ernst Georg Radlinger and Helena Radlingerová v Finway a.s (C-377/14)
Judgment
Consideration of the questions referred
The second question
65

Ernst Georg Radlinger and Helena Radlingerová v Finway a.s (C-377/14)

Judgment of 21 Apr 2016law://eu/cjeu/2014/c-377-14/para_65@2026-11-10

65Furthermore, there is a real risk that the consumer, particularly because of a lack of awareness, will not rely on the legal rule that is intended to protect him (judgment of 4 June 2015 in Faber, C‑497/13, EU:C:2015:357, paragraph 42 and the case-law cited).

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Third Chamber
Case: C-377/14 · ECLI:EU:C:2016:283
Decided: 21 Apr 2016
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Krajský soud v Praze (Regional Court, Prague, Czech Republic)
Applicants: Ernst Georg Radlinger; Helena Radlingerová
Defendant: Finway a.s.
Rapporteur: C. Toader
Advocate General: E. Sharpston
Bench: 5 judges
M. Ilešič, C. Toader, F. Biltgen, E. Jarašiūnas, C.G. Fernlund
Language: Czech
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62014CJ0377

Topics

Approximation of laws Consumer protection

History · 1 version

21 Apr 2016Reading

Connections

Interprets 2: Council Directive 93/13/EEC3 provisions; Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC
Cited by 18: Ryanair DAC v DelayFix (C-519/19); Györgyné Lintner v UniCredit Bank Hungary Zrt (C-511/17); TL and WE v Liquidator of Getin Noble Bank S.A., formerly Getin Noble Bank S.A (C-28/22); IO v Impuls Leasing România IFN SA (C-725/19); VK and Others v BMW Bank GmbH and Others (C-38/21); Profi Credit Polska S.A. v Bogumiła Włostowska and Others and Profi Credit Polska S.A. v OH (C-419/18, C-483/18); S.R.G. v Profi Credit Bulgaria EOOD (C-714/22); SP and CI v Všeobecná úverová banka a.s (C-598/21)3 provisions; Kancelaria Medius SA v RN (C-495/19); OPR-Finance s.r.o. v GK (C-679/18)2 provisions; A v B and C (C-738/19)4 provisions; Ultimo Portfolio Investment (Luxembourg) S.A. v KM (C-303/20); SIA “Soho Group” v Patērētāju tiesību aizsardzības centrs (C-686/19); P.W. v Bank Polska Kasa Opieki S.A (C-744/24); Horyzont Niestandaryzowany Sekurytyzacyjny Fundusz Inwestycyjny Zamknięty v LC (C-339/23); Eco Advocacy CLG v An Bord Pleanála (C-721/21); RN v Home Credit Slovakia a.s (C-290/19); Bondora AS v Carlos V. C. and XY (C-453/18, C-494/18)2 provisions
Cites 24: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016); Council Directive 93/13/EEC; Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC; Finanmadrid EFC SA v VA and Others (C-49/14); Monika Kušionová v SMART Capital, a.s (C-34/13); Banif Plus Bank Zrt v Csaba Csipai and Viktória Csipai (C-472/11); ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt v Attila Sugár (C-32/14); Pannon GSM Zrt. v Erzsébet Sustikné Győrfi (C-243/08); Nóra Baczó and János István Vizsnyiczai v Raiffeisen Bank Zrt (C-567/13); Pohotovosť s. r. o. v Miroslav Vašuta (C-470/12); Maribel Dominguez v Centre informatique du Centre Ouest Atlantique and Préfet de la région Centre (C-282/10); Dirk Frederik Asbeek Brusse and Katarina de Man Garabito v Jahani BV (C-488/11); Constructora Principado SA v José Ignacio Menéndez Álvarez (C-226/12); Froukje Faber v Autobedrijf Hazet Ochten BV (C-497/13)2 provisions; Cofidis SA v Jean-Louis Fredout (C-473/00); Maria Bucura v SC Bancpost SA (C-348/14); Eva Martín Martín v EDP Editores SL (C-227/08); Pohotovosť s.r.o. v Iveta Korčkovská (C-76/10); CA Consumer Finance SA v Ingrid Bakkaus and Others (C-449/13); LCL Le Crédit Lyonnais SA v Fesih Kalhan (C-565/12); Soledad Duarte Hueros v Autociba SA and Automóviles Citroën España SA (C-32/12); Commune de Mesquer v Total France SA and Total International Ltd (C-188/07); Unicaja Banco, SA v José Hidalgo Rueda and Others and Caixabank SA v Manuel María Rueda Ledesma and Others (C-482/13, C-484/13, C-485/13, C-487/13); Max Rampion and Marie-Jeanne Godard, née Rampion v Franfinance SA and K par K SAS (C-429/05)