Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Wroclaw, 1st Civil Division, dated 4th November 2019
I ACa 239/19

1. Insurance of low own contribution, as a security for the repayment of the loan, in itself is not prohibited, but it is contrary to good practices to shape the provisions on insurance of low own contribution in such a way that: they charge consumers with the cost of insurance and do not specify who is the beneficiary of the insurance coverage, do not allow consumers to determine their rights and obligations under the insurance contract, do not specify the amount, manner and principles of formation of the due fee that consumers must pay for low own contribution insurance, oblige consumers to cover the cost of the insurance premium even if they would repay the part of the loan covered by the insurance during the insurance coverage, do not specify the maximum duration of the insurance.

The Court of Appeals in Wroclaw, 1^st Civil Division, composed of:

Presiding Judge:           Agnieszka Terpiłowska, Judge of the Court of Appeal

Judges:                            Lidia Mazurkiewicz-Morgut, Judge of the Court of Appeal (Judge – Rapporteur);

Jacek Saramaga, Regional Court Judge (delegated)

having examined at a hearing on 16^th October 2019 in Wrocław the case brought by [data of 53 persons] against (…) Bank Polska JSC in W. for payment,

as a result of the appeal of the defendant from the judgment of the Regional Court in Wrocław dated 8^th November 2018, file number XII C 74/18:

1. amends the judgment under appeal so that in points:

1 and 2 awards from the defendant in favor of K. S.(2) and G. S. a total of PLN 382.50 (three hundred eighty-two 50/100),

16 and 17 awards from the defendant in favor of J. S. and B. S. a total of PLN 1,575.49 (one thousand five hundred and seventy-five 49/100),

32 and 33 awards from the defendant to M. B. and K. B. a total of PLN 860.00 (eight hundred and sixty 00/100),

39 awards from the defendant to K. I. PLN 178.90 (one hundred and seventy-eight 90/100),

53 awards from the defendant to W. K. PLN 4,249.79 (four thousand two hundred and forty-nine 79/100),

3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 54 the action brought by Mr A. P., E. S., M. E., M. W., P. P., M. K., K. S., R. S., T. T., M. M., K. Ś., M. O., B. K., M. K.(2), A. K., M. F.(2), B. F, A. S., M. Ś., Z. Ś., M. S., K. S.(3), M. C., D. C., J. C., M. C., E. C., A. S.(2), M. S.(2), M. I., G. R., B. R.(2), K. F., J. F., D. B., I. B., A. B., M. K., S. A., M. A., M. C.(2), M. F., A. B., M. B., A. K.(2), M. A. dismisses,

56 orders the plaintiff E. S. to pay to the defendant PLN 2,746.00 of the costs of the trial,

57 orders the plaintiff E. S. to pay to the State Treasury – the Regional Court in Wrocław PLN 1,803.00 of the missing court fee,

58 orders the defendant to pay to the State Treasury – the Regional Court in Wrocław PLN 145.00 of the missing court fee;

2. dismisses the appeal in its remaining scope;
3. orders the plaintiff E. S. to pay PLN 5,140.00 of the costs of the appeal proceedings to the defendant.