Supreme Court Session on CHF Loans Sparks Debate

The Croatian Banking Association (HUB) expressed surprise and concern following the publication of a Lider article about the convening of a session of the Civil Department of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia, scheduled for October 7, titled ‘Content of the Reasoning of Decisions in Conversion Cases – Discussion and Agreement’. HUB stated that they are worried about the fact that the invitation to the session was not publicly announced, even though the media already had information about its holding.

– This undermines the transparency of the process, which is a necessary element of the right to a fair trial – they stated.

HUB also emphasizes the possibility that judges who have a conflict of interest in cases related to CHF loans could participate in any potential decision-making or opinions, which, in their view, ‘undermines the integrity and legality of the judges’ work’.

– Judges have a legal obligation to recuse themselves in all cases where there is even the slightest doubt about their impartiality – HUB stated.

In conclusion, the Association finds it ‘surprising’ that the session is convened precisely at a time when amendments to the Law on Courts have already passed the first reading in the Parliament, as these amendments change the mechanisms of the work of the Supreme Court judges.

Due to this reaction from HUB, we sought a statement from the Supreme Court, which explained that the court ‘generally does not inform the public about scheduled sessions of the Civil Department, but publishes conclusions after the session has concluded if any are made’.

– This way, transparency in the work of the Civil Department is achieved – states the response from the Supreme Court.

They confirmed that the amendments to the Law on Courts and the Law on Civil Procedure, which are currently in the legislative process, will change the way the Civil Department operates and makes decisions, but also noted that ‘until their adoption, actions are taken in accordance with the applicable provisions.’

– The Supreme Court has not undermined the transparency of the work of the Civil Department and applies the legal provisions that are in force – they conclude.

On this topic, we also contacted the Franak Association, considering that they are also closely monitoring whether a decision on loans in Swiss francs will finally emerge. However, Goran Aleksić, the coordinator of the legal team of the Franak Association, does not expect anything concrete to be resolved at the announced session of the Civil Department.

– It will probably only be a discussion about already established legal understandings and possibly conclude that the legal understanding is still not uniform and that this will only be done later – Aleksić believes, who agrees with HUB in one aspect: that judges who have a conflict of interest should be excluded from deciding on this case. He cited a recent arbitration in Washington as an example of such conduct.

Aleksić believes that HUB does not want an extended panel to be formed according to existing rules, although he claims that this is possible at this moment.

– The Court of Justice of the European Union did not speak about the way the panel is composed. The existing rules on the work and composition of the extended panel are not established by law, but by the rules of procedure of the Supreme Court. Those rules are still in force, and the Supreme Court can form an extended panel according to them until a new law is adopted. When it comes into force, then new rules will apply – concludes Aleksić.

In the meantime, as we have already reported several times, it is becoming increasingly likely that the final decision in the ‘Swiss franc’ case will come from the Constitutional Court, which already has four submitted requests related to these lawsuits.