Submit your application

Are you familiar with the terms of the loan? That means you was not be deceived by the bank!

The borrower, who has familiarized himself with the terms of the lending, cannot accuse the bank of fraud or must prove his accusation in court, if it came to this.

Establishes this, shall we say, dogma, the legal conclusion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in case No. 569/423/15-c of 03/05/18 and the older conclusion in case No. 6-1341cc15 of 02.12.15.

These conclusions “answer” the question in which case it is considered that the bank does not violate the procedure for informing on the terms of the loan, and thereby neutralizes the possibility of applying the consumer law.

So, the conclusion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in case No. 569/423/15-c of 03/05/2018 establishes a rule stating that the plaintiff must substantiate his claims against the bank (accusation of fraud) with serious arguments, if he familiarized himself with the terms of the loan and confirmed the fact of familiarization with his signature.

Prehistory of conclusion

The citizen appealed to the court for the protection of her violated right of the consumer of financial services, the recognition of the loan agreement as invalid. The plaintiff insisted that the bank had deceived her – before and during the conclusion of the loan agreement, it did not fulfill the essential conditions of the agreement on providing borrowers with full information about the terms of the loan.

“She accused the bank of deliberately concealing the actual value of the real interest rate and the rise in the cost of the loan on her mortgage. According to the plaintiff, the bank, using elements of dishonest business activity in its activities, established unfair lending conditions restricting her consumer rights, thereby deceiving her! “

The bank, in a counterclaim, asked the court to recover the debt and penalty interest from the borrower and her guarantor, since she did not fulfill the financial obligation she had assumed.

Litigation …

It began with the refusal of the court of first instance to the bank in satisfying the counterclaim, – the borrower’s demand for the recognition of the mortgage agreement as invalid was recognized as justified.

The court decided that, indeed, the plaintiff had been deceived about the essential terms of the contract, the price and the interest rate, and therefore her expression of will to conclude an agreement in the form and in the amount established after the examination of the contract contradicted her desire to conclude an agreement on such conditions.

In particular, the court noted that the following points were not recorded in the agreement:

  • the consequences of the onset of currency risks;
  • inflationary warning;
  • calculations of the indexation of inflationary costs;
  • the reasons for the occurrence of the mortgage debt;

The court of appeal took the side of the bank, the cassation agreed with its conclusions!

The borrower was told that prior to the signing of the agreement, she had the opportunity to get acquainted with the information, disagree with the terms and not sign the agreement. The fact of signing documents according to the law is a fact confirming her consent in this case!



The granddaughter whiсh is registered in the grandmother’s house, for donation is not an obstacle!

The grandmother in court proved her right to donate housing, despite the fact that her little granddaughter was registered in it! The Supreme court, by its conclusion in case No. 385/1598/18, determined that she is not a parent and not the one who replaces him, therefore, she is free in the right of alienation! Here […]

Remote participation of persons in court sessions

The participation of the accused (convicted) person in the trial by video link, can it be considered by law as direct personal? The answer to the question contains the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine and this material. We analyze One of the innovations introduced in 2012 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine is the […]

Alternative to the Labor Code – “Labor Law 2020” from the CMU

The Cabinet of Ministers “rewrote” and laconized labor legislation! Instead of the Soviet Labor Code, containing 265 articles, the CMU proposes to introduce a modernized Labor Law, consisting of 98 articles. The corresponding project was registered in the Parliament under № 2708. Analyzing! “New rules… Forbidding! Bias and mobbing in the work environment, psychological and […]

SCU: matrimonial property is not always divided equally!

The Supreme Court of Ukraine, by its decision in case 308/4390/18 of 16.12.19, determined the aspects of deviation from the principle of equality of shares in the division of jointly acquired property of spouses. The fact of the presence of children living with the father (on his full support) and the mother, who does not […]

Can spouses divide an unauthorized built house in case of divorce?

They wanted to save money, but it turned out the other way around. The couple built a house in which they planned to live happily ever after, but the family union fell apart … In court, the question arose of how to divide the house, which, as it turned out, cannot be divided due to […]

Forge a document and not go to jail? Is it real?

Interestingly the judges are judging! There is no other way to say after analyzing case No. 750/5469 / 18, which reached the Supreme Court and ended with the publication of a legal conclusion on it on 03.03.2021. In the beginning there was an acquittal … The District Court concluded that the citizen was innocent of […]