Pravna literatura

Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 3 Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 4 Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 8 Unfair Contract Terms Directive, Article 8

The article summarises the judgement of the Supreme Court of Slovenia, dated 19/06/2020. As emphasized by the court, financial institutions must provide consumers with consumer information that is sufficient to make informed and prudent decisions. This requirement, which must be interpreted broadly, means that the consumer understands the condition both formally and grammatically as well as its actual scope, so that the average consumer, who is normally informed, reasonably observant and prudent, can not only be aware of the risk of such a condition, but that he is also able to assess the potentially significant economic consequences of fulfilling such a condition. The least that the bank should do in this case is to acquaint the plaintiffs with the subordination of bonds, to clarify the difference between ordinary and subordinated bonds, especially since the plaintiffs had previously subscribed for ordinary shares with this bank. Additionally, the bank should hand over conditions and inform them of the content of its Decision of 12 January 2007. This Decision states, inter alia, that BCE10 bonds are high-risk securities, that they are subordinated to pure debt instruments in the event of bankruptcy or liquidation and are paid only when paid all non-subordinated liabilities to ordinary creditors. As the bank did none of this, which led the plaintiffs to believe that, as they had on several occasions before, they were buying ordinary bonds, the Bank did not fulfil its duty to explain.