If you have a gold credit based on the WIBOR indicator, the proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Union may have a direct impact on your credit agreement, the amount of the instalments and further rules for its execution. The TEU set the deadline for the key proceeding on 12 February 2026. The consequence may be crucial for thousands of borrowers in Poland.
What does the WIBOR case before the TEU for borrowers mean?
The proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Union concern the fundamental question: whether the provisions of credit agreements referring to the WIBOR indicator may be subject to scrutiny for their fairness, transparency and compliance with Directive 93/13 on consumer protection.
For borrowers, this means to examine whether the bank:
- a fair explanation of how the WIBOR indicator is determined,
- duly reported the hazard of variable interest rate,
- presented the actual impact of WIBOR changes on long-term instalments.
The absence of specified information may be crucial in assessing the validity and effectiveness of individual contractual clauses and consequently the full credit agreement.
What can be the real effect of a TEU judgment?
If the TEU confirms that WIBOR clauses can be controlled under Directive 93/13, the effects on borrowers can be very circumstantial and felt in practice.
In particular, this may mean:
- opening the way for effective redress before Polish courts,
- the anticipation of recognising the WIBOR clause as accrual in an individual contract,
- potential eliminate WIBOR from the contract and leave interest based solely on the bank margin,
- Consequently, reduction of instalments or overpayments arising from the unfair borrowing mechanics and sometimes the cancellation of the credit agreement.
However, each credit agreement requires individual analysis – not all contracts are constructed in the same way.
Why are bank information obligations crucial?
The essence of the WIBOR case before the TEU is not just the mechanics for determining the indicator itself, but above all the scope and quality of the information provided to consumers at the time of the conclusion of the credit agreement.
In particular, whether the borrower is:
- clearly and clearly informed of the rules governing the establishment of WIBOR,
- prejudiced by possible crucial increases in credit instalments,
- with a real anticipation to measure the economical hazard associated with variable rate credit.
Lack of transparent information may lead to the designation that the consumer has not taken a decision in a conscious and full informed manner.
Why is the date of the proceeding on 12 February 2026 so important?
According to the authoritative information of the Secretary-General of the Court of Justice of the European Union, another trial in WIBOR was designated on 12 February 2026.
It is at this gathering that a judgement may be issued which will supply guidance to national courts examining disputes between borrowers and banks in WIBOR credit cases.
Case C-471/24 — what is the case before the EUSEU?
Proceedings before the EUSC under the signature C-471/24 (J.J. v PKO BP S.A.) was initiated by a preliminary ruling by District Court in Czestochowa.
The referring court asked the Court to clarify, inter alia, whether:
- Whereas contractual clauses referring to WIBOR may be controlled under Directive 93/13,
- These provisions fall within the limits of the alleged ‘main subject substance of the contract’,
- may lead to gross imbalances in the rights and obligations of the parties to the contract,
- if they are not available, the credit agreement may proceed to be executed without WIBOR.
The erstwhile course of the WIBOR case before the TEU
On 11 June 2025. A public proceeding was held before the Court of Justice of the European Union during which the views of the parties to the proceedings, the European Commission and the governments of the associate States were presented.
Then, 11 September 2025., Advocate General of the European Union AG Medina – presented its opinion on the subject. Although this opinion is not binding, in practice it is frequently an crucial mention point for the content of the final judgment.
What can you do now as a WIBOR borrower?
If you have gold debt based on WIBOR, it is now worth checking whether your contract meets the requirements of transparency and appropriate consumer information.
We offer free analysis of the credit agreementto assess:
- whether there are possibly abuzz WIBOR clauses in the contract,
- the importance of the future judgement of the EUSJ,
- what further legal steps should be considered.
You can send the contract to: == sync, corrected by elderman ==
