The court voided several contract clauses due to the very small font size used by the bank.
The Judicial Court of the District of Lisbon declared void dozens of contractual clauses in several credit agreements, including vehicle financing, credit cards and services associated with large retailers such as Worten, Sport Zone and Continente.
The decision affects practices of the BNP Paribas Personal FinanceSA, an entity that finances credits under brands such as Cetelem.
Among the reasons for cancellation, the following stands out: use of reduced size letters in contracts, making it difficult for consumers to read.
The sentence, announced this week, aims not only to protect the rights of consumers directly involved, but also to raise awareness of the existence of unfair clauses in similar contracts, says .
According to Sofia Lima, jurist at Deco Proteste, this judicial publicity is “fundamental” to inform other consumers and pressure financial institutions to respect the legislation.
This case dates back to 2011, which means that some voided clauses may no longer be in force. The lawyer reinforces the need for consumers to clarify any doubts with institutions before signing contracts, highlighting that these are obliged to provide clear information.
In this specific case, it was the Public Prosecutor’s Office that identified and analyzed the abusive clauses, resulting in a comprehensive judicial decision.
Since 2021, Portuguese law requires contracts to be written in font size not less than 11 (or 2.5 mm), with a minimum spacing of 1.15 between lines. These rules aim to make reading and understanding easier for consumers.
Furthermore, from July 2025, Banco do Portugal will implement standards for minimum dimensions in advertising messages about financial products and services, covering media such as television, internet and print media.
Between aces clauses considered abusive There are conditions that transfer additional costs to customers, such as mandatory reimbursements of expenses prior to the entry into force of contracts or unilateral changes to benefits by the financial institution.
Others stipulate that validation of a PIN implies automatic acceptance of transactions or that account statements are considered correct unless a specific complaint is made by the customer.
