High Court of Cassation and Justice has ruled that plaintiffs’ interpretation is mistaken in the sense that the Court may intervene on clause found to be abusive, in the meaning of its modification, as requested by the applicants, as the Court may intervene only to canceling the clause or part of clause being abusive, following that the contract shall continue only if the parties accept. This is arising out from the case law of the ECJ, in which it was held that the National Court can not modify the content of an unfair term in a contract between a seller or supplier and a consumer. When finding the existence of such a clause, the National Court must decide that it does not apply. (Decision no. 3234 of October 23, 2014 rendered the appeal of Section II of the Civil High Court of Cassation and Justice seeking a declaration unfair).
:: The Source: JURIDICE. ro