Evropski portal e-pravosodje

Podatki o zadevi
- Nacionalna ID: Supreme Court, Judgement II DoR 461/2021
- Država članica: Slovenija
- Splošno ime:N/A
- Vrsta odločbe: Sodba vrhovnega sodišča
- Datum odločbe: 12/01/2022
- Sodišče: Vrhovno sodišče RS
- Zadeva:
- Tožnik:
- Toženec:
- Ključne besede: consumer credit, court, unfair terms, nullity, imbalance between the rights of the parties

Prikaži vse|Skrči vse

Členi direktive

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

ECLI:SI:VSRS:2022:II.DOR.461.2021

Since the conditions set out in Article 367.a(1) of the Civil Procedure Act for the admission of revision were not met, 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 consumer and the bank concluded a notarial deed of the long-term foreign currency loan agreement in CHF and a mortgage agreement. After the conclusion of the credit agreement, the currency ratio between CHF and EUR changed significantly - the value of CHF increased against EUR - which significantly increased the creditors' credit obligation. Therefore, the plaintiff requested a declaration of invalidity of the credit agreement by which he had taken out a loan in Swiss francs from the defendant, and a consequent finding of invalidity of the registration of the mortgage. He also filed the alternative claim requesting the termination of this contract and the issuance of a land registry permit for the cancellation of the registered mortgage.
Pravna zadeva

- Is the decision in the impugned judgement that the defendant (bank) has duly fulfilled its duty of explanation in the specific case materially correct?

-Are the conditions for the admission of revision
Odločba

Since 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 especially 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 especially 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.

URL: http://www.sodnapraksa.si/?q=id:2015081111454461&database[SOVS]=SOVS&database[IESP]=IESP&database[VDSS]=VDSS&database[UPRS]=UPRS&_submit=i%C5%A1%C4%8Di&page=0&id=2015081111454461

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 not admitted. The decision is final

Sodna praksa

Celotno besedilo