1. The decision on the announcement on commencement of the group proceedings is not mentioned in Article 394 (1) CCP. Undoubtedly, it is also not a decision terminating the proceedings in the case, nor is it a decision which a complaint can be lodged against on the basis of the regulations contained in the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings. For this reason, it should be found that no complaint may be lodged against such a decision.

The Court of Appeals in Warsaw 6^th Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:         Agata Zając, Court of Appeals Judge

Judges:                        Małgorzata Borkowska, Court of Appeals Judge;

       Grzegorz Tyliński, Regional Court Judge (delegated; rapporteur)

having examined on 18^th December 2018 in Warsaw at the hearing in camera the case filed by the District Consumer Ombudsman in the Poviat of (…) – the group representative against (…) Towarzystwo Ubezpieczeń (…) S.A. with its registered office in W. for payment

The Regional Court in Warsaw 2^nd Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge: Marcin Polakowski, Regional Court Judge (rapporteur)

Judges: Magdalena Antosiewicz, Regional Court Judge; Sylwia Urbańska, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 10^th December 2018 in Warsaw the case filed by the group representative – the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman in S. acting on behalf of [data of 41 persons] against (…) SA with its registered office in W. for establishment

The Regional Court in Warsaw 2^nd Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:          Marcin Polakowski, Regional Court Judge (rapporteur)

Judges:                          Magdalena Antosiewicz, Regional Court Judge;

        Sylwia Urbańska, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 10^th December 2018 in Warsaw the case filed by the group representative – the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman in S. acting on behalf of [data of 41 persons] against (…) S.A. with its registered office in W. for establishment

1. The provision of Article 8 (1) of the Act on Pursuing Claims in Group Proceedings is facultative in nature and its application remains in fact at the discretion of the court. It is also not disputed in the case law and in the doctrine that the reason for rejecting a motion to secure costs may be the finding that the claimant (representative of the group) gives a guarantee that the obligation to reimburse the costs of the trial to the defendant will be met if the dispute is lost.

Regional Court in Warsaw 1^st Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:         Rafał Wagner, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                         Bożena Chłopecka, Regional Court Judge;

       Tadeusz Bulanda, District Court Judge (delegated)

having examined on 7^th December 2018 in Warsaw the case filed by M.B. as the representative of the group: [data of 43 persons] against (…) S.A. with registered office in W. for payment

The judgment was partially changed by the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Wrocław of November 4, 2019, I ACa 239/19

1. Performances delivered on the basis of a prohibited clause of low own contribution insurance, not binding for the members of the group, constitute undue performances and as such are subject to return under Article 410 (1) and (2) CC in conjunction with Article 405 CC.
2. Claims pursued on the grounds of unjust enrichment (Article 405 CC et seq.), in particular under Article 410 CC, which provides for undue performance, do not become due without a call for payment (Article 476 CC).

1. Court ability of the Municipal Consumer Ombudsman cannot be restricted by its territorial area of operation. Municipal Consumer Ombudsman has the court ability also when the person outside the territorial area of its operation area decides to join the group.
2. Any incorrectness in the announcement on group proceedings are verified at the stage of composition of the group and instance verification of this decision. There is no possibility to change such announcement in the appellate proceedings.

The Regional Court in Wroclaw 1^st Civil Division with the following ruling bench:

Presiding Judge:          Adam Maciński, Regional Court Judge

Judges:                          Sławomir Urbaniak, Regional Court Judge;

        Aneta Fiałkowska-Sobczyk, Regional Court Judge

having examined on 24^th October 2018 in Wroclaw at the hearing in camera the case filed by D. D. acting as the group representative against (…) Bank S. A. with its registered office in W. for establishment

Points 1., 2. and 3. of the operative part of the judgement were set aside by the judgement of the Court of Appeals in Lodz 1^st Civil Division of 9^th March, I ACa 80.19.

1. The prerequisite of legal interest from Article 189 CCP should be applied to members of the group and not to a representative of the group.
2. A legal interest within the meaning of Article 189 CCP does not occur if the claimant can obtain the protection of their rights by other legal means – e.g. an action for an award. The possibility to bring an action for a performance precludes the existence of a legal interest in bringing an action for establishment on the claimant’s part.
3. The fact of introducing an amendment to Article 69 of the Act of 29 August 1997 the Banking Law (adding Article 69 (2) (4a) and Article 69 (3)) does not mean that before the date of 26 August 2011 it was not possible to conclude agreements on a credit denominated, indexed or valorised to a foreign currency.
4. The change in the amount of the borrower’s liability in the valorised credit agreement is the result of a legal valorisation mechanism.
5. The allegation indicating that the entire foreign exchange risk burdens the borrowers is ungrounded. Depending on the economic situation on the market, the negative consequences of the currency conversion are borne by both the clients and the bank.
6. Using the valorisation mechanism is without prejudice to the nature of the credit agreement, banking law, or any other generally applicable national or international law. Under the principle of freedom of contract (Article 353¹ CC) the use of such a mechanism is permitted.
7. The parties may stipulate in the agreement that the amount of the monetary performance will be determined by a value measure other than money. What is at issue here is a measure other than that of the money that the obligation involves. It may, therefore, be a different currency.
8. The assessment of the compatibility of agreements with the principles of social coexistence should not be made in the light of the individual characteristics of individual consumers, since the claimant, claiming that the agreements covered by the action are invalid, seeks to examine their compatibility with the principles of social coexistence in a normative manner. What is to be examined is whether the construction of the contract, expressed on the basis of a single contract template and the resulting mechanism of valorisation, are compatible with the principles of social coexistence, and not whether the borrowers are educated people with knowledge of the financial market or incompetent people who are in a difficult situation at the date of conclusion of the credit agreement.
9. The conflict with the principles of social coexistence would arise if the defendant repudiatedly introduced into the market factors which would increase the exchange rate of the foreign currency in order to achieve its own benefits outside of the economic market mechanisms. The increase in the Swiss franc exchange rate over time is the result of economic market rules, which are not influenced by any of the parties to the agreement.