This is the first such verdict. The Court of Appeal declared invalid over a thousand mBank "franc" contracts

The Court of Appeal in Łódź has declared invalid over a thousand mBank contracts concerning CHF loans due to the inclusion of unfair contract terms, Business Insider reported. The contracts are treated as invalid from the moment they are concluded. This is the first final ruling in a class action lawsuit.

"However, it is worth recalling that in this case, the Court of Appeal granted security to all participants in the lawsuit. People who paid the bank in installments an amount higher than that paid by the bank were no longer required to pay the installments," it was written.

"In practice, group members who had the so-called overpayment at that time did not have to repay further installments, and the rest stopped paying when they repaid in total the amount they received from the bank as a loan in zloty. This was the first such group security in Poland," it added.

In 2021, mBank sued all group members for the loan amounts. Most of the cases are suspended pending the above judgment.

As reported, there are over 10 class action lawsuits pending in Poland against:

• mBank,
• Millennium,
• Santander Bank (this concerns loan agreements indexed to the CHF exchange rate concluded with consumers by Kredyt Bank),
• BPH
• Getin Noble.

Clients chose joint claims settlement because it was supposed to be cheaper and less demanding, but in reality it turned out to be difficult and lengthy.

In the position of mBank, referred to by BI, it was indicated that the court agreed to mBank's motion and excluded from the proceedings the persons who concluded settlements with the bank after the first instance judgment of 2024 (approx. 140 people) and discontinued the proceedings against them.

"This means that so far, almost half of the participants in these proceedings have decided to resolve the dispute amicably and have chosen settlements," said Marcin Wojtachnio, director of the disputed loans department at mBank.

He added that in the further part of the judgment the Court dismissed the bank's appeal, upholding the judgment of the court of first instance.

Moreover, in mBank's opinion, the verdict in this case is of a determining nature, i.e. each of the group participants must individually sue the bank in order to invalidate the agreement. (PAP Biznes)

alk/ ana/