The Court of Appeal amends the adverse judgement and establishes the nullity of the Fortis Bank Agreement

On 2 March 2026. The Court of Appeal in Warsaw (President of the SSA Agata Zając, SSA Małgorzata Borkowska, SSA Elżbieta Wietrzykowska) in case of case number VI ACa 243/24 v BNP Paribas Bank Polska S.A. with its registered office in Warsaw issued a judgement on appeal against the judgement of the territory Court of Warsaw of 11 May 2023 (Event No XXVIII C 6584/22), in which:

I. It amended the contested judgement in part:
1. He established that the mortgage debt agreement concluded on 19 July 2007 between the plaintiffs and Fortis Bank Polska S.A. (now BNP Paribas) was invalid.
2. He judged from BNP Paribas Bank Polska S.A. for the reasons of the full main claim, together with statutory interest for delaying the service of a copy of the lawsuituntil the date of payment.

3. Judged the suspect for reasons of reimbursement of the costs of proceedings of PLN 11.800 together with statutory interest for hold from 10 March 2026 to the date of payment.

II. He dismissed the appeal for reasons in the remaining scope.
III. He judged the suspect for the reasons for the reimbursement of the costs of the appeal procedure, amounts of PLN 8,600 plus statutory interest for the hold until the date of the final decision on the costs of the appeal procedure until the date of payment.

In the oral recitals of the ruling, the Court of First Instance considered that the appeal deserved to take into account, in most part, the nature of the disputed contract made by the first instance. The territory Court mistakenly qualified this undertaking as a clean currency agreement, while in fact the debt was paid in Polish currency, which was consistent with the intention of the borrowers themselves. This way of implementing the agreement led the bank to apply exchange rates resulting from its own exchange rate tables, which, in the light of the settled case law of the ultimate Court, is unacceptable due to the fact that these tables do not supply clear and nonsubjective rules for the fixing of rates.

In any event, the Court of Appeal stressed that even if the monetary nature of the debt was accepted, the bank did not fulfil its information obligations. The plaintiffs have not been sufficiently warned of the scale of currency hazard as required by Directive 93/13 and the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Information obligations are independent of national rules and must be strictly respected by traders concluding consumer contracts. In this case, those obligations are not fulfilled.
Consequently, the determination of the abuzzity of the abroad exchange hazard clauses and the references to the banking tables must be considered invalid. The Court of First Instance pointed out that, after the removal of these unlawful provisions, it is not possible to proceed to execute the contract or replace the gaps with another provisions, even if consumers consider the contract to be a favourable solution.

The claim for annulment and the reimbursement of the benefits fulfilled were so full justified.

The dismission of the appeal afraid only the time limit for the calculation of the statutory interest which, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal, it was appropriate to justice the interest from the date on which the copy of the application was served with the acceptance of 14 days for the performance of that benefit and, in the opinion of the General Court, the application full met all the requirements concerning the effective application of the suspect for payment.

The conviction is final.

Anna Wolna-Sroka from the Chabański Free-Sroka S.K.A. Attorney's Office led the case.