Decision of the Curia of Hungary in civil case no. Pfv.V.21.663/2017
| Pilns teksts |
2018 10 bk unios vonatkozasu hatarozat hu
- 57,34K
(jauna cilne)
|
|---|---|
| Paziņojuma presei / kopsavilkuma virsraksts | Summary of the decision of the Curia of Hungary in civil case no. Pfv.V.21.663/2017 |
| Paziņojuma presei / kopsavilkuma numurs | - |
| Paziņojuma presei pilns teksts |
2018 10 bk unios vonatkozasu hatarozat osszefoglalo en
- 33,28K
(jauna cilne)
|
| ECLI numurs | - |
| ELI numurs | - |
| Nolēmuma oriģinālvaloda | hongrois |
| Dokumenta datums | 06/02/2019 |
| Izdevējtiesa | Kúria (HU) |
| Joma |
|
| EUROVOC joma |
|
| Valsts tiesību norma | - |
| Minētā Savienības tiesību norma | |
| Starptautisko tiesību norma | - |
| Apraksts |
The legal provision according to which the default interest rate applicable to the service provider has to be equal to the default interest rate applicable to the consumer and a market environment in which other service providers have not applied more favourable general contract terms either, do not mean that the defendant has not gained such unilateral and unjustified advantage which has been detrimental to the other contracting party. The Curia was of the opinion that the fact that the default interest rates were identical in respect of both parties did not counterbalance – with regard to the different conditions and impacts of their interest payment obligation – the disadvantage suffered by the consumer. Hence, the defendant was unable to rebut the presumption of the invalidity of the impugned general contract term. |
