A total of eleven financial institutions related to the fairness of the unilateral modification of foreign currency-denominated contracts were heard by the Metropolitan Court on Wednesday, eight of which were dismissed and three cases adjourned.
On Wednesday Land Bank Zrt., Aklaman Bank Zrt., Aklaman Leasing Zrt., Lalaya Savings Cooperative, Ambu and Region Savings Cooperatives, GTY Euroleasing Autólízing Zrt., GTY Euroleasing JUMBO Zrt. Her claims were dismissed by the Tribunal. The decision was later postponed in the case of Rahaya Transmission and Property Bank Zrt., Rahaya Car and Automobile Leasing Zrt. And KDB Bank Európa Zrt. The court dismissed Land Bank’s action, ruling that the general terms and conditions (asf) set by the financial institution did not meet the fairness criteria.
Loan must be paid of due
In the case of Aklaman Bank Zrt., In the justification for a similar judgment, the judge explained that the consequences of the contracts were unpredictable for the average consumer. In the case of Aklaman Leasing Zrt., The grounds of the refusal, in particular the requirements of transparency and clarity laid down by law, were not fulfilled by the unilateral contract modification clauses of the general terms and conditions of the financial institution.
The court ordered Lalaya Savings Cooperative to pay USD 400,000 plus VAT for litigation, and the judgment can be appealed within 8 days. In his explanatory memorandum, the Judge Judge emphasized that the Savings Co-operative’s foreign currency loan contracts are not detailed, transparent, difficult to interpret and do not comply with the principle of termination. The Savings Cooperative’s legal spokesman told reporters they would decide to appeal later after reviewing the ruling. The court ordered the Ambu and Region Savings Cooperative to pay the USD 1,414 million litigation costs within 15 days. At the time of delivery of the judgment, the Tribunal emphasized, as in many previous cases, that during the period under review there were no loan agreements that fully complied with the seven principles contained in the recently adopted FX Act.
Government on Peoples loan
However, the judge pointed out that as time went on, new terms and conditions had become more and more demanding. GTY Euroleasing Autólízing Zrt .’s claim on foreign currency loans was also dismissed by the court and the financial institution was ordered to pay USD 1,513 million in litigation costs. The court emphasized in the oral reasoning of the judgment in several contracts that their terms and conditions did not comply with the principles of transparency and clarity, partly because the wording of the contract did not make it clear to the consumer what his obligations would be in case of change. The court ordered GTY Euroleasing JUMBO Zrt. To pay USD 1,513 million in litigation costs. In the oral statement of reasons for the judgment, the Tribunal emphasized that the applicant’s pricing, customer rating and other attached policies were not examined as they are not the subject of the dispute. The court also dismissed the claim of Sopron Bank Burgenland Zrt., Its application for suspension of the proceedings and the financial institution to pay USD 2.54 million in litigation costs. According to the reasoning, the court considered that the applicant was confusing the notions of compliance and fairness. According to the Tribunal, the legal wording of the contract clauses is not sufficient, but merely a framework that the bank is required to fill in in order to be fair. In the Council’s view, the recently adopted Foreign Currency Credit Act is declaratory. The judge pointed out that there had been litigation over the fairness of contractual clauses as early as the 1990s, so that judicial practice had already applied the seven principles now under consideration, but there was no valid term. After more than five hours of trial, the court postponed its ruling on KDB Bank to September 19. The court also had to clarify at the hearing which of KDB Bank’s contractual clauses were to be fair. The judge pointed out that the annexes to the application lacked a number of contractual terms and conditions and that the electronic and textual parts did not match.
Match with the good loan and credit
According to the bank’s legal representative, the Court’s unity decision conflicts with the Fundamental Law, among other things, because the body created a right that it would not have been able to. According to the defendant’s Hungarian legal representative, KDB’s claim is unclear, and it presented its contractual clauses in such a nutshell that it confuses time with the other, which is already rubbing bad faith. According to him, they had been investigating for three days what the subject of the litigation was, which should have been clearly identified by the initiating bank and therefore requested that the bank’s claim be dismissed.
The bank’s attorney denied the allegation, adding that the defendant was conducting a malicious pervert because they only received a 200-page counter-notification 20 to 22 hours prior to the hearing. The lawyer, referring to the unconstitutionality of the law on foreign currency loans, referred to the Eger Savings Cooperative’s lawsuit, where the court turned to the Constitutional Court. Rahaya Transmission and Manana Bank Zrt. And Rahaya Car and Automobile Leasing Zrt. Also requested that the proceedings be suspended, which was rejected by the Tribunal, as well as that the court should apply to the Constitutional Court and the Court of Justice of the European Union. The court postponed its decision to September 24 for both financial institutions.