The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has determined this Thursday that the statute of limitations on a debt produces effects only when the consumer invokes it in the judicial proceedings, so that the creditor company can continue to demand payment even if the legal deadline to make the claim has already expired.
This conclusion is set out in a judgment by the court based in Luxembourg that answers a request for a preliminary ruling referred by the Court of First Instance No. 1 of Fuenlabrada (Madrid). This judicial body asked whether European Union law authorizes judges to assess the statute of limitations of a debt claimed by a company that has purchased the credit from a financial institution on their own initiative.
In its ruling, the CJEU specifies that "a claim cannot be considered unenforceable merely due to the statute of limitations", since this "extinguishes the right to that claim only if the defendant invokes it during the judicial proceedings". Accordingly, it holds that going to court to claim a debt that could be time-barred does not, by itself, amount to a misleading commercial practice contrary to Community law.
The dispute stems from a loan signed in November 2015 by a Spanish consumer and another person with the entity Nuevo Micro Bank. The contract set its due date for December 2018, but the bank decided to seek early repayment in July 2016 upon finding missed payments.
In July 2024, the financial institution assigned the credit to the Maltese company Investcapital, which in February 2025 brought an action before Spanish courts to recover the amounts owed. The Fuenlabrada court found that the debt could have become statute-barred in 2021, having passed five years since the early due date without any action being recorded that interrupted that period.
EU rules do not require the judge to review the statute of limitations
In light of these doubts, the Spanish judge referred a request for a preliminary ruling to the CJEU to clarify whether European consumer protection rules allow courts to verify on their own initiative that a debt has become time-barred, even when the consumer has not raised it, in order to prevent credits that would cease to be enforceable if the statute of limitations were invoked from being collected.
The CJEU answers that European regulations do not deal with this specific point. Although it strengthens consumer protection, it does not contain "specific provisions" on the statute of limitations for debts nor on the power of judges to declare it of their own motion.
The European court also rules out that a judicial claim by a non-bank company for a potentially time-barred debt can automatically be classified as "an unfair commercial practice," noting that the parties enjoy "freedom" to present their positions in the proceedings and that it is for the consumer to allege that the debt is time-barred.
Therefore, the CJEU concludes that it is the member states, including Spain, that must specify in their domestic law whether judges may assess the statute of limitations of a credit of their own motion, as long as "European principles" of equivalence and effectiveness are respected.
Ultimately, it will be Spanish justice that decides the case by taking into account the interpretation of Union law established by the CJEU in relation to the actions of Court of First Instance No. 1 of Fuenlabrada.