This paper studies how counterfactual explanations can be used to assess the fairness of a model. Using machine learning for high-stakes decisions is a threat to fairness as these models can amplify bias present in the dataset, and there is no consensus on a universal metric to detect this. The appropriate metric and method to tackle the bias in a dataset will be case-dependent, and it requires insight into the nature of the bias first. We aim to provide this insight by integrating explainable AI (XAI) research with the fairness domain. More specifically, apart from being able to use (Predictive) Counterfactual Explanations to detect explicit bias when the model is directly using the sensitive attribute, we show that it can also be used to detect implicit bias when the model does not use the sensitive attribute directly but does use other correlated attributes leading to a substantial disadvantage for a protected group. We call this metric $PreCoF$, or Predictive Counterfactual Fairness. Our experimental results show that our metric succeeds in detecting occurrences of implicit bias in the model by assessing which attributes are more present in the explanations of the protected group compared to the unprotected group. These results could help policymakers decide on whether this discrimination is justified or not.