CASE FRANAK Consumer Lawyer: This is 10 percent of what we are asking for. The banking association has also spoken out

The Supreme Court has completed the discussion in the case of the Swiss franc, accepting the legal interpretation according to which users who converted loans to euros are entitled to the payment of default interest, but not to compensation that would cost banks between 20 and 25 billion kuna.

– This is a victory for the banks in this case, this is a disaster for consumers. This is not what we asked for and expected – Igor Metelko, the lawyer representing clients who sued the banks, told Index.

– Three different legal interpretations were made in three different legal decisions. One legal interpretation granted consumers the full amount of what we are claiming. The second interpretation gives us nothing, and the third legal interpretation only provides default interest for the subscription from the conversion, which is perhaps 10 percent of what we are asking for, says Metelko.

For the third interpretation, the only one that had enough votes, 13 judges voted. Ten votes, two less than needed, received the interpretation under which consumers would receive compensation. The least votes, only six, received the interpretation under which consumers do not need to receive anything.

Can the decision be overturned?

The Supreme Court states in a press release that all “court decisions representing three different legal interpretations will be subject to control by the Court Practice Record Service.”

– I do not know what that exactly means, can they stop that decision, can it not pass the record. We will have to see – says the lawyer. It is possible that the decision is halted if it contradicts some other decision or practice of the European Court, however, this will only be known in a few days, says Metelko. Now we are waiting for the announcement of the decision and the review cases, after which the situation will be clearer.

Banks can now demand the return of those amounts from citizens who have been paid definitively, and they will certainly do so, believes the lawyer. – We absolutely expected a victory, the right is undoubtedly on the side of consumers. This is not a fight between the small and the large, no one asked for fan or political decisions, but to judge according to the law. The law is certainly on our side – he said. – Banks have never provided any coherent reasons that would indicate that we do not have the right to compensation – said Metelko.

Banks: The solution is contrary to the rule of law

The Croatian Banking Association also commented on the legal interpretation presented by the Supreme Court. – Based on a preliminary review of the press release from the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia, it is possible to notice that the request for additional restitution, as demanded by consumer representatives, was not accepted.

However, the Croatian Banking Association still maintains that the issue was fully resolved by the conversion in 2015 and believes that the legal interpretation adopted by the Supreme Court deviates from its previous positions expressed in the test procedure, as well as certain provisions of the legal solution that regulated the conversion. Therefore, it can be concluded that such a solution is contrary to the constitutional principle of the separation of powers and the rule of law and will consequently negatively affect the level of legal and investment security in the Republic of Croatia, as well as its perception in the eyes of the domestic and foreign investment public.

Banks will consider further options and legal remedies available to them and will decide individually on their application – states the HUB press release.