In its decision on Wednesday, the Metropolitan Court of Appeal upheld the first instance judgment of the Metropolitan General Court in the case of Goodbank Ingatlanlízing Zrt., Dismissing the credit institution’s claim against the Hungarian State for overturning the presumption relating to the General Terms and Conditions.
In the brief oral justification of the judgment
The court also ordered the plaintiff’s financial institution to pay HUF 250,000 plus VAT at second instance. In the brief oral justification of the judgment, the judge explained that, like the Court of First Instance, the financial institution’s request for access to the Constitutional Court and the Court of Justice of the European Union was unfounded.
The literal transposition of certain statutory provisions
The panel shared the view of the Court of First Instance and the defendant Hungarian State that the literal transposition of certain statutory provisions into the asf does not preclude the examination of unfairness, as these are framework laws which the asf must fill.
The judge said that since the issue of law had to be decided, the court had sufficient expertise and there was no need for a witness to be heard. The court of second instance also found it indifferent that the code of conduct had been complied with by the plaintiff’s financial institution, since the parties could not have made any claim to it.
The panel found that the contractual terms examined were unacceptable in terms
The panel found that the contractual terms examined were unacceptable in terms of transparency, clear and comprehensible wording, and therefore unfair and ineffective.
Each clause of the asf must be examined in its entirety, the judge stated, adding that it is logical to exclude some of its terms and establish partial validity for the remainder. he presumption relating to the General Terms and Conditions.