Important judgment in the case of Swiss franc borrowers. The court prevents additional claims against banks.
How much benefit will the invalidation of the loan agreement bring to Swiss franc borrowers? The District Court for Warsaw Śródmieście has just dashed these hopes in a loud dispute between the president of the Stop Bank Lawlessness Association and Bank Millennium. Although the CJEU judgment from a few months ago seemed to open the door to demanding additional capital appreciation from banks, the Polish court found that there was no place for “free” money.
This morning, in Business Insider, we announced the verdict that was to be handed down on Wednesday in the District Court for Warsaw Śródmieście. This is a case brought by Arkadiusz Szcześniak, president of the Stop Bank Lawlessness Association, brought against Bank Millennium. The borrower demanded remuneration for the bank's use of his capital. Such indexation was to be calculated based on the average interest rate on loans or taking into account the inflation rate.
This case was directly related to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of June 15, 2023 in the famous case C-520/21, issued as a result of preliminary questions from a national court.
The rest of the text below the video:
The court decided on the indexation of the borrower's capital
According to our information, the court in today's judgment dismissed the borrower's claim in its entirety and awarded the bank the costs of the proceedings.. In practice, this means that as part of the settlement of the Swiss franc agreement invalidated by the court, the borrower will not receive additional money apart from the return of the capital itself and the interest due for the delay.
— In the oral reasons for the decision, the court said that the CJEU judgment C-520/21 did not oppose the consumer's claims, but left their assessment to the national courts – says attorney Bartosz Miąskiewicz from the CMS Polska law firm, who, together with attorney Anna Cudna-Wagner, represented the bank in this case.
The court assessed that the plaintiff's claims for payment of amounts exceeding the reimbursement of benefits and interest were not based on the applicable provisions. He said that the conditions for unjust enrichment had not been met. This means that the bank did not enrich itself at the expense of the borrower, and the plaintiff did not become poorer because the bank received from him repayments of the loan installments that the bank itself had granted (the court could have meant that it was the bank's capital).
See also: Prices are in check, wallets are getting fatter. Will optimistic inflation data encourage the Monetary Policy Council to make further cuts?
— The court pointed out that the claim for payment of interest for delay exhausts the claims of both parties regarding the “use of capital”. He found that when the creditor calls the debtor for payment and, on this basis, demands interest for the delay, their payment exhausts the claims – adds attorney Miąskiewicz. He points out that this judgment is consistent with the arguments and position he cited together with attorney Cudna-Wagner, the CJEU ruling and the judgments issued by courts in Bielsko-Biała and Słupsk in similar cases.
— According to the court, the consumer's claim includes, among others: for judicial indexation of benefits has not been demonstrated and has no basis. The oral justification of the judgment is unclear to me, it does not convince me, and therefore we will consider an appeal against the judgment – says legal advisor Radosław Górski, who represented the borrower in this case, for Business Insider.
See also: Will banks give all their money back to Swiss franc borrowers? An important dispute about Poles' wallets
— However, a negative judgment in this case does not change in any way the fact that this case led to key rulings of the CJEU for Swiss franc borrowers, depriving banks of the right to judicial capital appreciation and remuneration for the use of capital, and – by the way – banks losing in thousands of court cases and “damage” to the banking sector. Given the judgment of the CJEU in this case, I consider this case a success for all consumers – adds attorney Górski.
The Polish Bank Association comments on the Swiss franc verdict
In the opinion of the Polish Bank Association today's decision is correct and fully consistent with the position presented by the Polish Bank Association. “The court correctly interpreted the CJEU judgment in case C-520/21, consistent with the previous case law of Polish courts,” the Polish Bank Association said in a comment.
The union added that The CJEU judgment did not determine the existence of claims on the part of borrowers for payment of remuneration for the use of capital or for their indexation. The Court merely held that EU law would not preclude the assertion of such claims as long as national law provided for a clear and unambiguous basis for them.
“At the same time, the CJEU pointed out that any claims of this type would have to meet very stringent conditionsresulting from purpose of Directive 93/13 and the principle of proportionality. The purpose of the directive is to restore the factual and legal situation in which the consumer would have found himself if he had not concluded the contract. Additional remuneration for consumers – beyond the reimbursement of benefits and interest payable – would, in our opinion, exceed these limits,” it added.
