Algunas reflexiones acerca de la stjue de 9 de julio de 2020 sobre los pactos novatorios en materia de cláusulas suelo

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Publication date
2021
Reading date
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Metrics
Export
Abstract
The Sentence of the Court of Justice of the European Union of July 9, 2020 comes to answer the five questions that, in its preliminary question, the Court of First Instance and Instruction No. 3 of Teruel asks about the validity of the new agreements in the context of the floor clauses, establishing jurisprudential doctrine on this matter about which our Supreme Court had previously ruled in its Judgments of October 16, 2017, in the sense of considering the agreed floor clause null as a consequence of the novation agreement and, subsequently, those of April 11, 2018 and September 13, 2018 in the opposite direction, declaring that the novation agreement was valid. It is a long-awaited and insistently commented resolution after its publication, in attention, no doubt, both to its well-founded substantive relevance - due to the legal doctrine that it consolidates and which results from unquestionable application, and its economic repercussion - as well as its procedural significance. -by the consequence of the lifting of procedural suspensions that its dictation supposes, agreed as a result of the ruling of the Luxembourg Court-. In this paper I will review the doctrine contained in the STJUE in its comparison with the one previously declared by our Supreme Court, in order to conclude what its incidence is with respect to the criterion maintained by our High Court in its Judgments of April 11, 2018 and September 13, 2018.
Description
Keywords
2070-8157 22082 Revista Boliviana de Derecho 565487 2021 31 7730055 Algunas reflexiones acerca de la stjue de 9 de julio de 2020 sobre los pactos novatorios en materia de cláusulas suelo Castillo Martínez
Carolina del Carmen The Sentence of the Court of Justice of the European Union of July 9
2020 comes to answer the five questions that
in its preliminary question
the Court of First Instance and Instruction No. 3 of Teruel asks about the validity of the new agreements in the context of the floor clauses
establishing jurisprudential doctrine on this matter about which our Supreme Court had previously ruled in its Judgments of October 16
2017
in the sense of considering the agreed floor clause null as a consequence of the novation agreement and
subsequently
those of April 11
2018 and September 13
2018 in the opposite direction
declaring that the novation agreement was valid. It is a long-awaited and insistently commented resolution after its publication
in attention
no doubt
both to its well-founded substantive relevance - due to the legal doctrine that it consolidates and which results from unquestionable application
and its economic repercussion - as well as its procedural significance. -by the consequence of the lifting of procedural suspensions that its dictation supposes
agreed as a result of the ruling of the Luxembourg Court-. In this paper I will review the doctrine contained in the STJUE in its comparison with the one previously declared by our Supreme Court
in order to conclude what its incidence is with respect to the criterion maintained by our High Court in its Judgments of April 11
2018 and September 13
2018. Hipoteca
cláusula suelo
pacto novatorio
consumidor
interés remuneratorio
variabilidad del interés.
Mortgage
floor clause
new agreement
consumer
remunerative interest
interest variability 132 159
Bibliographic reference
Castillo Martínez, Carolina del Carmen. Algunas reflexiones acerca de la stjue de 9 de julio de 2020 sobre los pactos novatorios en materia de cláusulas suelo. En: Revista Boliviana de Derecho, 31 2021: 132-159