Judgment of the Court of Justice Fifth Chamber, 20 March 2025, Arce, C-365/23

• Date: 20 March 2025
• Year: 2025

31

unforeseen and unforeseeable events not att ributable to the parties have a significant influence on

the operating risk of that concession.

Further, although Article 43 of Directive 2014/23 refers to the situation of a modification the need for

which has been brought about by circumstances which a diligent contracting authority or contracting

entity could not foresee, it does so solely in order to make clear t hat a new award procedure is not

necessary, without imposing an obligation on the contracting authority to initiate a procedure for

modifying the concession.

That conclusion is supported by the fact that the objective of Article 43 of that direct ive is to clarify the

conditions under which modifications to a concession during its performance require a new award

procedure by listing a limited number of situations in which the opening of a new award procedu re is

not necessary, and not to require M ember States to provide that a concession must necessarily be

capable of bein g modified in each of th ose situat ions.

VIII. CONSUMER PROTECTION: UNFAIR TERMS

Judgment of the Court of Justi ce (Fifth Chamber), 20 Mar ch 2025, Arce, C-365/23

Link to the full text of the judgment

Reference for a preliminary ruling – C on su mer p ro tectio n – D irecti ve 93/13/EEC – Scope – A rt ic le 2(b) –

Article 3( 1) – Article 4(2) – Article 5 – Article 6(1) – Article 8a – Pre-formulated standard contract – Con tract

between a supplier providing services for development and career support for sportspersons and a ‘rising

star’ sportsman of minor age represented by his parents – Term esta blishing the ob ligation to pay to that

supplier remuneration equal to 10% of the income received by that sportsman over the following

15 years – Ch arter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Articles 17 and 24 – Right to property –

Rights of the child

Hearing a reference for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (S enāts) (Suprem e Court (Senate),

Latvia) , the Court of Justice cla rifies the scope of the co ncept of ‘consumer’ an d defines the crit eria for

assessing t he unfairness of a cont ractual term, wit hin the meaning of Directive 93/13, 41 in t he context

of a cont ract for services for sports development and career support for a sportsperson concluded

between a supplier and a ‘rising star’ sportsman of minor age, represent ed by his parents, requiring

him to pay remuneration equal to 10% of the net income received over the 15 years following the

conclusion of that contract.

A is a company which offers s portspersons services to support the dev elopment of their professio nal

skills and careers. On 14 January 2009, C, a mi nor who wa s then 17 years old, represented by D and E,

his parents, concluded a contract with A for services for sporting development and career support in

the field of basketball for a period of 15 years. Under that contract, concluded at a time when C was

not yet a professional sportsman, he undertook to pay A remuneration equal to 10% of all the net

income which he would receive throughout the duration of the contract, plus the value added tax

applicable in L atvia, pro vided th at the amo unt of t hat income was at least EUR 1 500 per month.

On 29 June 2020, A, taking t he v iew that the remuneration p rovid ed for in the contract for t he services

rendered t o C had not been paid , brought an action b efore the Latvian courts seeking an order that C

and his parents pay to it the sum of EUR 1 663 777.99, corresponding to 10% of C’s income from

contracts co ncluded with spo rts clubs.

41 Council Dir ective 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29), as amen ded by D irective 2011/83/EU

of the Eur opean Parliament and of the Council of 25 Octobe r 2011 (OJ 2011 L 304, p. 64).