WIBOR before the Court of Justice of the European Union - are we going to have a repeat of the franc cases?

Following the June proceeding before the TEU and before the September Opinion of the Advocate General of the TEU, the case concerning WIBOR-based credit agreements enters a crucial phase. There are many indications that we may be dealing with a replay of the script that launched the celebrated Franc case of the Dziubak State (C-260/18).

WIBOR (Warsaw Interbank Offered Rate) is the basis for the interest rate on most mortgages and consumer loans in Poland. It is based on bank estimates of the amount of interest at which they are willing to lend each another funds alternatively than real transactions.

On 11.09.2025. The Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union (TEU) has been given an opinion on the WIBOR variable interest rate, which may be of crucial importance for gold-credit holders based on this indicator.

In August 2018, the Warsaw territory Court referred a preliminary question to the TEU. On 19.02.2019 the first proceeding was held before the TEU, and on 14.05.2019 the opinion of the Advocate General of the TEU was issued. The consequence was a landmark judgement of the CJEU of 03.10.2019, in which the CJEU indicated that if clauses in the franc agreement are unfair and are prevented from executing the contract, the consumer may request the cancellation of the full credit agreement.

At the heart of the dispute, the question is whether national courts may consider clauses referring to WIBOR to be unfair if transparent information about variable interest hazard is not provided to the consumer.

The situation is very akin to the phase at which they were frankovists in May 2019 – just before the breakthrough. The Ombudsman’s opinion may find whether courts will have grounds for:

• recognising WIBOR records as unfair,

• eliminating WIBOR from the contract (with a margin left),

• and even cancel the full credit agreement.