(AGENPARL) - Roma, 12 Gennaio 2023

(AGENPARL) – gio 12 gennaio 2023 Dear All,
Please find attached press release in respect of Judgment of the Court in Case C-395/21 | D.V. (Lawyers’ fees – Principle of an hourly rate)
A term in a contract for the provision of legal services concluded between a lawyer and a consumer which sets the price on the basis of an hourly rate, without including any further details, does not satisfy the requirement of being drafted in plain intelligible language
The national court may restore the situation in which the consumer would have been in the absence of an unfair term, leaving the seller or supplier without any remuneration for the services provided
Kind regards,
Vittorio Quartetti
Trainee
Press and Information Unit
Communication Department
[cid:image002.jpg@01D5E282.B6DDC230]
[logo-en]
Rue du Fort Niedergrünewald
L-2925 Luxembourg
[curia.europa.eu](https://www.curia.europa.eu/)

Testo Allegato:
Communications Directorate

Press and Information Unit

curia.europa.eu

PRESS RELEASE No 10
/23

Luxembourg,
12

January

2023

Judgment of the Court in Case C
–
395/21 | D.V. (
Lawyersâ?? fees

â??

Princip
l
e
of an hourly rate
)

A term i
n
a
contra
c
t
for the provision of legal

services conclu
ded

a lawyer and a

cons
u
mer

which sets

th
e
price

on the basis of an hourly
rate
,
,
does not satisfy the
requirement of being drafted in plain intelligible language

The national court may

restore the

situation
in which th
e cons
u
mer

would have been in the
abs
ence
of an
unfair term
,

leaving

the seller or supplier
without

any remuneration for the services provided

M.A., as a consumer, concluded five contracts for the provision of legal services for consideration with D.V., in her
capacity as a lawyer
.
Each of th
ose

contra
c
ts
provided that the fees were calculated on the basis of an hourly rate
,
fixed at

â?¬
100

for each hour of

consultation o
r

of provision of legal
services
to

M.
A.

D
.V.
provided legal

services
in

2018
and

2019
and issued bills

for all the

services
provided in

March

2019
.

When she did not receive all the fees
claimed
, D.V.
brought an action b
efore the Lithuanian court of first

instance
seeking an order that

M.A.
pay

the sum
of

â?¬

9

900
in respect of the legal services performed and â?¬

194.
30

in respect of the expenses incurred in the
performance of the contracts.

That court

upheld

D.V.
â??s applica
tion in part
.
The appeal brought by

D.V.
was dismissed
by the appeal court
.
In

2020
,

D.V.
brought an appeal on a point of law before the Supreme Court of Lithuania
.

That court asks the

Cour
t

of Justice
how to
interpr

provisions of EU law

1

intended to pr
otect consumers from
unfair contract terms
,
in particular

with regard to the scope of the requirement

that a term in a contract for the
provision of legal services must be drafted in plain intelligible language

and
to
the

effe
c
ts
of a finding that a term
s

the price of those

services

is unfair
.

In its judgment delivered today
,
the

Cour
t

states, first of all, that

a term which determines the principalâ??s obligation
to pay the lawyerâ??s fees and sets out the price of those fees

falls within the

concept of

â??
main subject matter of the
contractâ??
.
Accordingly
,
a term in a contract for the provision of legal services concluded between a lawyer and
a consumer, which sets the cost of the services provided on the basis of an hourly rate, is covered by that

concept
.

As regards

the scope of the requirement that a term in a contract for the provision of legal services must be drafted
in plain intelligible language
,
the

Cour
t

emphasises that, under EU law
,
that requirement

must be understood in a
broad sense
.
This requ
to which the relevant term relates
,
so that that consumer is in a position to evaluate, on the basis of clear, intelligible
criteria, the economic consequences fo
r him or her which derive from it
.
However, the

Cour
t

observe
s that,

although a seller or supplier cannot be required to inform the consumer of the final financial consequences of his or
her commitment, which depend on future events which are unpredictable

and beyond the control of that seller or
supplier, the fact remains that the information which the seller or supplier is required to provide before the

1

Council
Directive 93/13/EE
C

of

5

April

1993

on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L

95, p.

29)
.

Communications Directorate

Press and Information Unit

curia.europa
.eu

conclusion of the contract must enable the consumer to take a prudent decision in full knowledge of the

possibility
that such events may occur and of the consequences which they are likely to have with regard to the duration of the
provision of legal services concerned
.
That information, which may vary according to, on the one hand, the subject
matter and n
ature of the services provided for in the contract for legal services and, on the other, the applicable
rules of professional conduct, must include particulars that enable the consumer to assess the approximate total
cost of those services. Such particular
s might be an estimate of the expected number or minimum number of hours
needed to provide a certain service, or a commitment to send, at reasonable intervals, bills or periodic reports
indicating the number of hours worked
.
The

Cour
t

notes that it is for
the national court

to assess, taking into
account all the relevant factors surrounding the conclusion of that contract, whether the information provided by
the seller or supplier before the conclusion of the contract enabled the consumer to take a prudent
decision in full
knowledge of the financial consequences of concluding the contract
.
The

Cour
t

rules that
a term in a contract for
the provision of legal services

which sets the price on the basis of an hourly rate, without the consumer
being provided

befo
rehand

with information that enables him or her to take a prudent decision in full
knowledge of the economic consequences of concluding that contract, does not satisfy the requirement of
being drafted in plain intelligible language

within the meaning of EU

law
.

With regard to the possible unfairness of such a term, the

Cour
t

observe
s
,
in the light of
its

case
–
law
,
that it is for the
national court to assess
,
having regard to all the circumstances of the case, first, the possible failure to observe the
requi
consumer
.
The assessment of the unfair character of a term in a contract concluded with a consumer is based, in
principle, on an overall assessment
which does not take account solely of the possible lack of transparency of that
term
.
That being so
,
the Court notes that it is open to the Member States to ensure, in accordance with EU law, a
maximum degree of protection for the consumer
.
With regard to
the present case
,
the

Cour
t

finds that
a term in a
contract for the provision of legal services

within the main subject matter of that contract, is not to be considered unfair simply o
n the ground that it does not
satisfy the requirement of transparency
,

unless national legislation expressly provides
for classification as an unfair
term simply on that ground
.

As regards the conse
quences
of a finding that a term regarding cost is unfair
,

the Court
observe
s

that the
national
court is under an obligation to disapply that term
,
unless the consumer objects
.
Where
,
pursuant to the relevant
provisions of national law
,
a

contra
c
t
for the provision of legal services

is

not be capable of continuin
g in existence
after the term regarding cost has been removed, Directive 93/13 does not preclude the invalidation of

that contract
,
even if, as a result, the seller or supplier does not receive any remuneration for the services provided
.
However
,
the
refer
ring court has the exceptional possibility of replacing an unfair term that has been annulled with a
supplementary provision of national law

particularly unfavourable consequences
.

In the light of those

consid
e
rations
,

the

Cour
t

rules that

the consumer to particularly unfavourable consequences
,
EU law does
not preclude the national court from
remedying the invalidity of

that term by replacing it with a supplementary provision of national law or a provision of
national law applied by mutual agreement of the parties
.
On the other hand,

EU law

precludes the national court
from replacing the unfair term that has been annulle
d with a judicial assessment of the level of remuneration due
for

the
services
provided
.

Communications Directorate

Press and Information Unit

curia.europa
.eu

Stay Connected
!

NOTE:

A reference for a preliminary ruling allows the courts and tribunals of the Member States, in disputes which
have been brought before them, to refer question
Union law or the validity of a European Union act. The Court of Justice does not decide the dispute itself. It is for the
national court or tribunal to dispose of the case in accordance with th
e Courtâ??s decision, which is similarly binding on
other national courts or tribunals before which a similar issue is raised.

Unofficial document for media use, not binding on the Court of Justice.

The
full text

and the abstract

of the judgment is published on the CURIA website on the day of delive
ry.

Press contact: Jacques René Zammit
â??

(+352) 4
303

335
5