For many recent weeks there’s been a public discussion on possible judgement, which the courts may hold with respect to foreign currency options. In theory, by virtue of Polish law, a court might hold void or change the terms of contract concerning foreign currency options.
In order to form the opinion as to the existence of an error as to the act in law or deception, it is necessary to get acquainted with the facts of each case. General remarks and comments concerning potential dispute can only be hypothetical. Thus, they are of general character.
It is similar with references to the general clauses, especially to a clause concerning major change of economic situation (rebus sic stantibus clause regulated by art. 357¹ of the Civil Code) in a court disputes, made by a party (company or entrepreneur), or to a clause concerning activities of a bank, which are described as being contrary to principles of social co-existence (art. 58 § 2 of the Civil Code), or activities contrary to freedom of contracting principle (art. 353¹ of the Civil Code) especially in terms of asymmetry of undertaken risk of losses between the parties to the contract concerning foreign currency options.
In a litigation, in order to refer to the above-mentioned clauses, the party who conducts commercial activity is obliged to prove that either of them can be applied and that it forms liability of the bank. It is inevitably connected with a long-lasting and complex stipulations, which should focus only on examination of documents connected with disastrous transactions by the court. Even if these stipulations are successful in the litigation, i.e. for example if a party proves that he acted under the essential error as to the act in law and therefore the court should hold the contract to be void and ineffective, then the problem of mutual discharge of liabilities between the parties to the transaction appears. It result from the fact that the contract concerning foreign currency options will be hold as void ex tunc. That does not mean that there will be no obligation of mutual discharge of liabilities as regards the void transaction. An unjust enrichment may be taken into account in this case.
The litigation concerning foreign currency options will be the litigation of commercial character. The party, who conducts commercial activity is treated as a professional and therefore is required to exercise higher standards of due diligence in court proceedings. It refers mainly to complete description of his allegations, stipulations and giving proves already in the Writ of Summons. In case it is done at a later stage of litigation, it may be found to be inadmissible.
Before the party decides to institute litigation, he should realize that the court judgment in his case, will be of some sort of precedential character. Till now, no judgment have been held in the cases of the kind under consideration. Therefore it is likely that first of them will have to be decided by the Supreme Court, which means few years of proceedings before the final judgment is issued. Besides, commencement of litigation means bearing the costs of litigation like a court fee, and what seems to be inevitable – expenses on witness-experts etc.
Some facilitation in examination of the disputes concerning foreign currency options might bring the Act on Collective Enforcement of Claims in Litigation, which is under parliamentary works at present. Pursuant to the draft of that Act, at least 10 persons, acting together, may lodge a Collective Writ of Summons, if legal and factual grounds of their claims are identical, under the condition that there are vital factual circumstances justifying these persons to act together. Some cases referring to the contracts concerning foreign currency options might fulfill mentioned-above requirements of the said Act because they were concluded in line with the same general terms and conditions applied by a specific bank. The collective enforcement of claims in litigation might also limits costs of proceedings.
Commencement of litigation by the party, which conducts commercial activity, is burdened by not small risk, even due the reason, that the said party as a professional is burdened by the higher standards of due diligence in the course of contracting the transaction. Therefore, making references by this party to for example unawareness of the level of risk connected with the contract concerning foreign currency options and deriving positive legal consequences for himself from it, will not always turn out to be effective. Consequently, institution of the litigation should be considered as a final way of resolving the dispute. Thus, the first suggested option for entrepreneurs and companies should be commencement of negotiations with banks and taking this way of solving the problems arisen from the transactions under consideration.