The Regional Court in Warsaw, 25th Civil Division, composed of:

Presiding Judge: SSO Piotr Bednarczyk

Judges:                 SSO Anna Błażejczyk, SSO Paweł Duda

having examined on December 18, 2018, in Warsaw, at a closed session, the case brought by M. P. as representative of the group against Bank (…) S.A. with its registered office in W. (…) Bank (…) in C. Bank (…) in S. W. Bank (…) with its registered office in J. for a determination,

1. It is generally accepted in case law and doctrine that a legal interest within the meaning of Article 189 of the Code of Civil Procedure exists when there is uncertainty as to the legal status or law, giving rise to a need for legal protection. This uncertainty must be objective in nature, i.e., it must exist on the basis of a reasonable assessment of the situation in which the claimant brings such an action. Therefore, legal interest in a claim for determination of a legal relationship or right cannot be questioned when it is relevant to both current and future possible, but objectively probable, legal relationships and rights or the legal situation of the entity bringing the claim. On the other hand, the absence of such an interest can be said to exist both when the claimant has no need to establish a right or legal relationship, and when he can fully protect his rights in a simpler and easier way, e.g. in proceedings for the performance or establishment of a right or legal relationship.
2. The concept of “conditions for changing the interest rate” within the meaning of Article 69(2) of the Banking Law should be understood in such a way that the content of the agreement allows for a precise determination of when the interest rate should increase and when it should decrease.
3. The extent to which the party exercised the rights resulting from the prohibited contractual provisions is irrelevant to the resolution of the case. This is because the invalidity of contractual provisions has an ex tunc effect and is enforceable by law, and therefore the manner in which they are exercised is irrelevant.
4. The method of determining the interest rate, which meant that the borrower was, in fact, entirely dependent on the creditor’s decision, and the creditor himself largely determined the level of the benefit due to him, is contrary to the nature of the contractual relationship and, consequently, invalid. The consequence of this invalidity is the invalidity of the entire agreement. Without specifying the conditions for changing the interest rate, the entire variable-rate loan agreement is invalid.
5. The interest rate on a loan is one of the essential elements (essentialiae negotii) of a loan agreement provided for in Article 69(1) of the Banking Law. The elimination of such a provision means that the loan agreement loses its character and, as a consequence, is invalid.
6. The assessment of the agreement from the point of view of prohibited clauses is made according to the status at the time of conclusion of the agreement. It is therefore not possible to effectively amend an agreement that has been invalid since its conclusion.
7. The issue of choosing a loan indexed to a foreign currency does not in itself mean that a specific indexation mechanism has been individually negotiated.
8. The risk of exchange rate volatility is one thing, but the arbitrary setting of exchange rates by the bank’s management, which clearly affects the consumer’s situation, is another. On the other hand, specifying the conditions for determining the exchange rate at which the loan is to be repaid according to the selling rate applicable at the National Bank of Poland cannot be considered an abusive provision. The latter is an objective criterion, independent of both parties to the legal relationship resulting from the agreements concluded between them.

The Regional Court in Warsaw, 1st Civil Division, composed of:

Presiding Judge: SSO Piotr Królikowski (rep.)

Judges:                 SSO Ewa Ligoń-Krawczyk, SSO Agnieszka Onichimowska

having examined on January 16, 2024, in Warsaw, in a closed session, the case brought by the Financial Ombudsman representing a group consisting of: [data of 13 persons] against (…) Branch in Poland with its registered office in G. for a determination

The Regional Court in Warsaw, 4th Civil Division, composed of the following:

Presiding Judge:           SSO Andrzej Sterkowicz

Judges:                           SSO Karol Smaga, SSR del. Radosław Tukaj

having examined on April 23, 2019, in Warsaw, at a closed session, the class action brought by M. S. – representative of the group – against the State Treasury – the Prosecutor General, the Regional Prosecutor in Gdańsk, the District Prosecutor in Gdańsk – Wrzeszcz in Gdańsk for payment,

The Regional Court in Katowice, 1st Civil Division, composed of the following:

Presiding Judge: SSO Krzysztof Żyłka

Judges:                 SSO Jolanta Polko, SSO Krystian Markiewicz

having examined on September 3, 2015, at a hearing the case brought by W. S. against (…) Limited Liability Company in M. for payment,

1. An urgent action is an action which, if not performed before the anticipated date of appointment of a legal representative for the party or appointment of a body competent to represent it, would expose the party requesting the appointment of a guardian to irreparable damage. In principle, this may be an action of any kind; however, it must be specific and require urgent action. This circumstance should be substantiated by the party applying for the appointment of a guardian.

The Regional Court in Katowice, 1st Civil Division, composed of:

Presiding Judge: SSO Jolanta Polko

Judges:                  SSO Krzysztof Żyłka, SSO Piotr Semper

having examined on October 26, 2015, in Katowice, at a closed session, the case brought by W. S. against (…) Limited Liability Company in M. for payment,

The Regional Court in Katowice, 1st Civil Division, composed of:

Presiding Judge: SSO Krzysztof Żyłka

Judges:                 SSO Jolanta Polko, SSR del. Katarzyna Zadora

having examined on March 30, 2016, in a closed session, the case brought by W. S. against (…) Limited Liability Company in M. for payment,

decides:

The Regional Court in Wrocław, 1st Civil Division, composed of:

Presiding Judge: SSO Dominika Romanowska

Judges:                 SSO Rafał Cieszyński, SSO Marcin Śmigiel

having examined in closed session on August 3, 2020, in Wrocław, the case brought by M. G. against (…) sp. z o.o. s.k. with its registered office in I. for payment,

decides:

The Regional Court in Wrocław, 1st Civil Division, composed of:

Presiding Judge: SSO Dominika Romanowska

Judges:                 SSO Rafał Cieszyński, SSO Marcin Śmigiel

having examined in closed session on March 6, 2020, in Wrocław, the case brought by M. G., acting as representative of the group, against (…) sp. z o.o. sp. k. with its registered office in I. for payment,

decides: