‘Truth is not only stranger than fiction, it is more interesting’, a famous saying by William Randolph Hearst goes. It rings true not only for newspaper men, but also for judges who have to decide on politically charged legal questions in times of economic crisis. This Chapter will address one telling example from the European case law on the implementation, interpretation and application of Directive 93/13 on unfair terms in consumer contracts: the interaction among national and European Union (EU) legislature and judiciary in the Spanish case of Aziz v Catalunyacaixa.

An account of the Aziz case touches upon a number of subjects that Hans Micklitz has addressed in his extensive work on European consumer and contract law, including the evolution of consumer law in the EU, the normative design of European private law and the development of effective remedies for breaches of Union law by the judiciary. With this Chapter, therefore, I hope to contribute to the further analysis of these themes as well as to express my admiration and great appreciation for Hans Micklitz’s work and for his open, sincere and thoughtful manner of engaging with other people’s views and beliefs. His questions always challenge me to look beyond the obvious and sharpen my thoughts and the way in which to express them. One thing this has taught me is to look into the reception of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU)’s judgments in national legal systems to fully grasp their meaning and understand their importance for the conceptualisation of the legal order shaped by European contract law. The following analysis of the Aziz judgment may be read against this backdrop.