Evropski portal e-pravosodje

Podatki o zadevi
- Nacionalna ID: Supreme Court, Judgement 142/2021
- Država članica: Slovenija
- Splošno ime:N/A
- Vrsta odločbe: Sodba vrhovnega sodišča
- Datum odločbe: 01/09/2021
- Sodišče: Vrhovno sodišče RS
- Zadeva:
- Tožnik:
- Toženec:
- Ključne besede: consumer credit, unfair terms, nullity, imbalance between the rights of the parties, court

Prikaži vse|Skrči vse

Členi direktive

Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 3 Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 4
Uvodna opomba

ECLI:SI:VSRS:2021:II.DOR.142.2021

The conditions set out in the first paragraph of Article 367.a of the Civil Procedure Act for the admission of revision were not met therefore the Supreme Court rejected a motion to allow a revision of the judgement regarding the annulment of the consumer credit agreement in Swiss francs.
Dejstva

The first consumer (plaintiff) concluded a credit agreement with the defendant (bank) with a currency clause in CHF on 12 April 2007, and the third consumer (plaintiff) on 14 February 2008. The subject of the agreements was a housing loan in EUR equivalent to the amount expressed in CHF according to the European Central Bank reference rate for CHF. It was stipulated that the plaintiffs repay the loan in the same monthly annuities set out in the CHF. The currency ratio between CHF and EUR changed significantly after the conclusion of the credit agreement, which significantly increased the creditors' credit obligation.
Pravna zadeva
- Is the substantive assessment of the lower courts that the defendant complied with the duty to explain the currency risk associated with the Swiss franc currency clauses in consumer credit correct in accordance with the methodology and criteria interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union if it has not provided documentary evidence for its claims?
- Is the correct substantive assessment of the court of second instance that the clarity and comprehensibility of the contractual terms excludes the assessment of the fairness of the main subject of credit agreements and the assessment of nullity or partial annulment of the contract due to the inadmissibility of the legal basis of the currency clause, so the court is not required to answer in the judgement other appellate arguments on the issue of good faith of the defendant and the significant imbalance between the rights and obligations of the parties?
- Is the decision of the court of second instance that the risk of excessive consumer concern must be taken into account in assessing the appropriate intensity and scope of informing consumers in order to fulfill the duty to explain?
- Are the conditions for the admission of revision met?
Odločba
As the conditions set out in the first paragraph of Article 367.a of the Civil Procedure Act for the admission of revision were not met, the Supreme Court rejected the proposal in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 367.c of the Civil Procedure Act. The Court allows a revision if the decision of the Supreme Court can be expected to decide on a legal issue that is important for ensuring legal certainty, uniform application of the law or for the development of law through case law. The Court allows a review in particular in the following cases:
- if it is a point of law in respect of which the decision of the court of second instance deviates from the case law of the Supreme Court;
- if it is a point of law in respect of which the case law of the Supreme Court does not yet exist and in particular if the case law of higher courts is not uniform; or
- if it is a point of law in respect of which the case law of the Supreme Court is not uniform.
Those conditions were not met in the present case therefore the Court did not decide the issues raised.

Celotno besedilo: Celotno besedilo
Povezane zadeve

Zadetki niso na voljo
Pravna literatura

Zadetki niso na voljo
Zadetek

A motion to allow a revision of the judgement was dismissed. The decision is final.

Sodna praksa

Celotno besedilo