Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 5kWORD 17k
13 September 2017
Question for written answer E-005666-17
to the Commission
Rule 130
José Blanco López (S&D)

 Subject:  Mortgage floor clauses
 Answer in writing 

In December 2016, the CJEU confirmed that the Spanish Supreme Court judgment placing a temporal limitation on the effects of the declared invalidity of unjust mortgage floor clauses was incompatible with EC law. The Spanish Government subsequently decided to introduce an arbitration mechanism to prevent the courts from being swamped by the resulting caseload pending the creation of specialised courts to deal with these claims. Different news outlets then revealed that, in many cases, the arbitration proceedings were failing to give satisfaction and that the courts were unable to process the thousands of lawsuits being filed.

Is the Commission following up on the enforcement of the CJEU judgment in Spain? Faced with the prospect of a foundering judiciary, does it plan to take appropriate action?

Original language of question: ES 
Legal notice - Privacy policy