The Court of Justice of the European Union issued three rulings, with a fourth pending, concerning the statute of limitations in Polish cases involving loans denominated in Swiss francs.
TSUE Ruling on Interrupted Limitation Periods
In case C-752/24, the TSUE ruled that a bank can interrupt the statute of limitations by filing a lawsuit even before the consumer’s claim is resolved. The case stemmed from conflicting arguments presented by the bank in the consumer’s lawsuit versus its own claim.
The TSUE’s decision aligns with current Polish court practice, as a lawsuit generally interrupts the statute of limitations for both primary and secondary claims. However, the bank’s inconsistent arguments may preclude it from claiming late payment interest.
Judicial Discretion and Equitable Principles
In case C-753/24, the TSUE stated that a national court may disregard the statute of limitations on a bank’s claim and apply the principle of fairness under Article 1171 of the Polish Civil Code.
The TSUE cautioned that applying equitable principles could create legal uncertainty for consumers and should be based on objective criteria.
Consumer Acknowledgement of Debt and Limitation Periods
In case C-901/24, the TSUE clarified that the limitation period for a creditor’s claims is interrupted by a consumer’s statement during proceedings acknowledging an obligation to repay the loan amount if the contract is deemed invalid.
This applies specifically to clear and unequivocal acceptance of the repayment obligation, equating it to an admission of debt. Statements indicating a mere possibility of repayment do not qualify.
Impact on Assessing Limitation Periods
The recent ruling primarily affects the assessment of interrupting the statute of limitations on bank claims and does not impact the calculation of the commencement of the limitation period. A ruling on this matter is expected in cases C-261/25 – C-262/25 Ścierbek and others.
Upcoming Ruling on Commencement of Limitation Period
The pending cases address whether EU law prevents national court interpretation of statutes where the limitation period for a creditor’s claim against a consumer begins when the consumer disputes the contract terms.
The case will examine the principle of equivalence, ensuring that violations of EU law are not less severe than violations of national law. Currently, Polish courts calculate limitation periods differently for contracts invalidated due to breaches of EU versus national law.
Anticipated Resolution and Potential for Settlements
A ruling in cases C-261/25 – C-262/25 Ścierbek and others is expected before the summer recess and is considered the most significant in the series of TSUE rulings on Swiss franc loan cases. This ruling is expected to spur settlement negotiations as both parties gain clarity on potential outcomes.
The TSUE previously clarified the calculation of interest and costs in these cases, suggesting a potential end to the legal saga.
