Ravensburg B\u00f6lge Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan \u00f6n karar ba\u015fvurusu \u00fczerine Avrupa Birli\u011fi Adalet Divan\u0131, t\u00fcketici kredi s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerine ili\u015fkin 23 Nisan 2008 tarihli ve 2008\/48\/EC say\u0131l\u0131 Direktifin yorumlanmas\u0131 hakk\u0131nda karar vermi\u015ftir. S\u00f6z konusu Direktif, 87\/102\/AET say\u0131l\u0131 Konsey Direktifini y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckten kald\u0131rm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (9 Eyl\u00fcl 2021 tarihli karar, C-33\/20; C-155\/20; C-187\/20).
\nB\u00f6lge Mahkemesi nezdindeki dava, t\u00fcketiciler ile VW Bank, BMW Bank ve Skoda Bank aras\u0131nda imzalanan otomobil kredisi s\u00f6zle\u015fmeleriyle ilgiliydi. Baz\u0131 t\u00fcketiciler, s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerin imzalanmas\u0131ndan birka\u00e7 y\u0131l sonra cayma haklar\u0131n\u0131 kulland\u0131. Avrupa Birli\u011fi Adalet Divan\u0131 (ABAD), b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde t\u00fcketiciler lehine karar verdi. Kredi s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinde yer alan bilgilerin \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckteki AB hukukunun gereklerini kar\u015f\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bu nedenle s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerden cayman\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011fu sonucuna var\u0131ld\u0131.<\/p>\n
Cayma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ge\u00e7erli \u015fekilde kullan\u0131labilmesi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan belirleyici husus, 2008\/48\/EC say\u0131l\u0131 Direktifin 14. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen 14 g\u00fcnl\u00fck cayma s\u00fcresinin ba\u015flay\u0131p ba\u015flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131yd\u0131. Bunun i\u00e7in t\u00fcketicinin, T\u00fcketici Kredisi Direktifi\u2019nin 10. maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen t\u00fcm s\u00f6zle\u015fme \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131 ve bilgileri alm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekir.
\nTemel unsurlar<\/p>\n
AB Adalet Divan\u0131\u2019na g\u00f6re bu bilgiler, 2008\/48\/EC say\u0131l\u0131 Direktifin 10. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (a), (c) ve (e) bentleri uyar\u0131nca, s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin bir \u201cba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 kredi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi\u201d oldu\u011funa ili\u015fkin a\u00e7\u0131k ve \u00f6zl\u00fc bir ifadeyi ve s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin s\u00fcresini i\u00e7ermektedir.
\n2008\/48\/EC say\u0131l\u0131 Direktifin 10. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (l) bendi uyar\u0131nca, kredi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin imzaland\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihte ge\u00e7erli olan gecikme faiz oran\u0131 belirli bir y\u00fczde olarak belirtilmeli ve gecikme faiz oran\u0131n\u0131n de\u011fi\u015ftirilmesine ili\u015fkin mekanizma somut \u015fekilde a\u00e7\u0131klanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Hesaplama y\u00f6ntemi, ortalama bir t\u00fcketici taraf\u0131ndan kolayl\u0131kla anla\u015f\u0131labilir olmal\u0131 ve t\u00fcketicinin yaln\u0131zca kredi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde yer alan bilgilere dayanarak gecikme faiz oran\u0131n\u0131 hesaplayabilmesini sa\u011flamal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
2008\/48\/EC say\u0131l\u0131 Direktifin 10. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (r) bendi uyar\u0131nca, ortalama bir t\u00fcketici, somut ve anla\u015f\u0131l\u0131r \u015fekilde belirtilmi\u015f bir hesaplama y\u00f6ntemi arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla erken \u00f6deme h\u00e2linde \u00f6denecek tazminat\u0131n tutar\u0131n\u0131 belirleyebilmelidir.
\n2008\/48\/EC say\u0131l\u0131 Direktifin 10. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (t) bendi uyar\u0131nca, s\u00f6zle\u015fmede mahkeme d\u0131\u015f\u0131 \u015fik\u00e2yet ve itiraz yollar\u0131na ili\u015fkin t\u00fcm temel bilgiler ile, uygulanabilir oldu\u011fu durumlarda, bu prosed\u00fcrlere ili\u015fkin masraflar da belirtilmelidir.
\nGerekli olmayan unsurlar<\/p>\n
Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k, 2008\/48\/EC say\u0131l\u0131 Direktifin 10. maddesinin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131, 3. maddenin (n) bendi anlam\u0131nda bir ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 kredi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi s\u00f6z konusu oldu\u011funda, bu t\u00fcr bir s\u00f6zle\u015fmenin belirli \u00f6zellikleri hakk\u0131nda bilgi verilmesini zorunlu tutmamaktad\u0131r. \u00d6rne\u011fin, kredi veren taraf\u0131ndan sat\u0131c\u0131ya \u00f6denen kredi tutar\u0131 \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcnde t\u00fcketicinin sat\u0131n alma bedelini \u00f6deme y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden kurtuldu\u011funun ayr\u0131ca a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 gerekmez.<\/p>\n
2008\/48\/EC say\u0131l\u0131 Direktifin 10. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131, AB hukuku kapsam\u0131nda uygulanabilir olmayan ulusal cayma kurallar\u0131 hakk\u0131nda bilgi verilmesini de zorunlu k\u0131lmamaktad\u0131r.
\nSonu\u00e7<\/p>\n
ABAD\u2019\u0131n bu karar\u0131, \u00e7ok say\u0131da t\u00fcketici kredisi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan cayma hakk\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131labilece\u011fi anlam\u0131na gelmektedir. 14 g\u00fcnl\u00fck cayma s\u00fcresi, ancak 2008\/48\/EC say\u0131l\u0131 Direktifin 10. maddesinin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131nda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen bilgilerin t\u00fcketiciye verilmesinden sonra ba\u015flar. ABAD, kredi s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerinde \u00f6zellikle yukar\u0131da belirtilen bilgiler d\u00e2hil olmak \u00fczere temel unsurlar\u0131n eksik olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde, hakk\u0131n kaybedildi\u011fi veya k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki itirazlar\u0131n ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclemeyece\u011fine h\u00fckmetmi\u015ftir.
\nBu nedenle baz\u0131 durumlarda s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerden, imzaland\u0131klar\u0131 tarihten y\u0131llar sonra dahi cay\u0131lmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olabilir.
\nUygulamada kullan\u0131lan bir\u00e7ok s\u00f6zle\u015fme d\u00fczenlemesi, AB Adalet Divan\u0131 karar\u0131nda belirtilen \u015fartlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lamamaktad\u0131r. Direktif, ipotekle teminat alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f krediler hari\u00e7 olmak \u00fczere t\u00fcketici kredisi s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerine uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, otomobil kredilerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra \u00e7ok say\u0131da ba\u015fka t\u00fcketici kredisi s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi de bu karardan etkilenmektedir.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In preliminary ruling proceedings referred by the Regional Court of Ravensburg, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on the interpretation of Directive 2008\/48\/EC of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87\/102\/EEC (judgment of 9 September 2021, C-33\/20; C-155\/20; C-187\/20). The proceedings before the Regional Court concerned […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":29,"featured_media":55523,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-55520","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t