January 26, 2021

A Barcelona judge raises the IRPH again to the EU Court of Justice


The head of Court 38 of Barcelona, ​​Francisco González de Audicana, has sent a new preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to be more precise in its interpretation of the use of the IRPH index in mortgages. The European court was already positioned in March, leaving the assessment in the hands of the courts, while the Supreme Court ruled in October that these clauses were not very transparent, but not abusive, so it decided not to declare them invalid.

The Supreme Court concludes that the mortgages with IRPH were not very transparent but not abusive

The Supreme Court concludes that the mortgages with IRPH were not very transparent but not abusive

Know more

“The ruling of March 3, 2020 – of the CJEU – has given rise to different interpretations by the different judicial bodies at the national headquarters and recently by different judgments of the Supreme Court, remaining in this judge doubts that require more information, related to the subject matter of sentence “, indicates in the order the magistrate.

This is the same judge who raised the IRPH matter to Europe in February 2018. Audicana this week submitted a new request for preliminary rulings to the CJEU, requesting more information regarding the “different interpretations” of the different national courts and the “recent rulings of the Supreme Court “, which found a lack of transparency but not abusiveness in several IRPH clauses analyzed.

The magistrate recalls in the order that the financial entity on which this case is about presented a petition to recuse him, a question that was rejected by the Provincial Court of Barcelona.

Specifically, the judge has formulated up to six questions that he considers have remained unclear, such as why the publication in the BOE of the index “saves all transparency requirements regarding the calculation and composition of the IRPH, including the obligation to inform the consumer “, or if it is contrary to European law that, once the clause incorporating the IRPH Cajas has been declared in the contract, the judge replaces it with IRPH Entities,” taking into account that both are determined by the same and complex calculation method. ”

Asufin has pronounced this Thursday urging the Supreme Court to paralyze all matters pending resolution until the CJEU returns to pronounce itself, in order to avoid “irreparable damage” to those affected. “The Supreme Court can not continue to dispatch matters with the damage that this will cause to many affected who will not have the opportunity to recover their money as happened with the floor clause,” said the president of the association, Patricia Suárez.

.



Source link