The development of European Union law demonstrates that if the contract is concluded for purposes partly within and partly outside the person’s trade and the trade purpose is so limited as not to be predominant in the overall context of the supply, that person should be considered as a consumer and the contract concluded by him should be regarded as a consumer contract. The Gruber judgement, cited by the final judgement, established in respect of the scope of application of a procedural convention, namely the Brussels Convention that a contract with a dual purpose may be qualified as a consumer contract only if its business use is merely negligible. For the qualification of the contract, the national court should take into consideration not only its content, nature and purpose, but also the objective circumstances in which it was concluded. With regard to the above arguments and the facts and specificities of the case at hand, the Curia concluded that the final judgement of the court of second instance had not violated the provisions of section 206, subsection (1) of the former Code of Civil Procedure and had correctly qualified the dual purpose loan contract in question as a consumer contract.