He dismissed the claim by Good Finance Zrt., Good Finance and Leasing Zrt. And Goodbank Zrt. Regarding the fairness of the unilateral amendment of foreign currency loan agreements in a first-instance, non-final judgment of the Metropolitan General Court on Tuesday.

Credit institutions have sought to overturn a legal presumption in a lawsuit


Against the state that clauses allowing unilaterally modified foreign currency loan contracts – interest rates, charges and costs are unfair and invalid.
However, according to the court, Good Finance Zrt.’s general terms and conditions did not comply with the statutory principles, in particular the principle of transparency, but also violated the principles of proportionality, symmetry and specification.

According to the oral justification, the leasing company made no distinction as to how and to what extent the business interest rate, the default interest rate or the change in the fees and charges affect unilaterally the contracts. In addition, the leasing company listed the reasons for the change to be unfavorable to the consumer, which violated the principle of symmetry.

The court also stated in the explanatory memorandum


In order to determine the unfairness of a leasing company in Asf, it would have been sufficient to examine only the terms of the contract on the basis of the principle of transparency, since each of the seven principles must be complied with.

When dismissing Good Finance and Leasing’s claim, the court stated in its oral argument that the statutory principle of symmetry does not apply unless the financial institution is compelled to reduce the burden on the consumer; creditor. He added that it would be a violation of the principle of transparency if the terms listing changes to fees and charges do not specify the extent to which charges may be changed.

The consumer should be able to anticipate the future burden


Goodbank Zrt. Dismissed the action on Tuesday, and ordered the bank to pay the litigation costs. The lawyer for the applicant financial institution, after the hearing, said to MTI’s interest that they would probably appeal against the judgment. The first instance decision can be appealed to the Metropolitan Court of Appeal within 8 days.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *