Source: Newzchat Romania
Controversial lenders in foreign currencies in countries with the only legal means of payment are in fact the betrayal of national economic interests, by the state's powers in favor of the banking mafia, which illegally introduced into fictitious foreign currency accounts, called by the implicit specialty literature CJUE "account currency" beacon that these coins denominated in credit "credit currency" to exist, implicitly be paid to the consumer.
What explains the European Court of Justice and what does the Romanian judge understand?
Continued abuse of credit consumers and not only, the corrupt judge, imbecile politician, bandit lawyer and of course the manipulative press, who propagate manipulation speculating on the lack of information and largely the stupidity of the majority, contribute to the continued abuse of credit consumers. Without mourning my dear compatriots, but the truth is upsetting you and you do not even notice the help I'm trying to give you, exposing the mafia abuses in the courts.
It took me some time to dissect and seek the confirmation of some information about what Av. Ghe pipeline on Case C-126/17 ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt. against Orsolya Czakó,
We finally found, but the CJEU is only in French and Hungarian. Why not in the other European languages, you will see that they are dealing with what I have been writing for years, claiming that these conventions presented by the banking mafia as credit agreements are in fact derivative contracts.
Recently, in Banca Transilvania's response, the consumer who asked, received the following answer:
"As I mentioned, the provision of loans was made by transfer to current accounts in EUR and CHF opened in your name , and not by releasing cash from the cashier of the bank . Therefore, no payment receipts in foreign currency corresponding to the credits granted by Volksbank Romania were issued. "
So, your bankers, you have become DEPOSITORS of fictitious amounts created by your gentlemen by forgery of foreign monetary values. And if you have become DEPOSITORS of the currency, we see what the Civil Code is saying to you in defenses with the theory of monetary nominalism. The point is that one of the consumers refused to get what the bank dictated by the cashier on the grounds that they did not have cash in the cashier, consequently the bank l + drove the other consumer with whom they continued the contract. The culmination is that he forced the one who did not get anything from the bank. At the end of the article you can see the ladies and ladies readers, which is the depository's obligation, in this case the BT mafia bank with her bust with everything.
And if the payment receipts are not, what do you ask the poor consumer if you have no proof that you have given it!?
How does the Romanian courts deal with the consumer who discovers excruciation and exposes you publicly?
Humiliating and abusing him. As an example, the Cluj County Court, to which I have called for the Nullity of Credit Conventions motivated by abusive clauses that harm not only the consumer concerned but also the implicit national economy of the EU, Judge Cosmina Codrescu, considers that the complainant does not have the quality of consumer because disputes the quality of the debtor, so he applies his JUDICIAL TAX, at the value in lei of the two conventions denominated in currencies which are actually continued by refinancing in CHF, and the cola over the puppy then sold at a secret price to a recovery company that and executed the consumer at incredible values, although the papers clearly show that the adress had not received any money, but had just signed the contract that was not executed by the bank. The judge in question also demanded the value of selling the poor consumer's claim, although the terrorist bank was responding to the consumer that these values are confidential. Not that he wanted the good of the consumer but only to apply the judicial fee and value. The bank has yet to divulge how much it has sold the "CDS" and not a certain claim. If they respond to the Court, I will let you know how much the bank credit it has sold, after grossly deceiving consumers.
Inadvertently, the consumer challenges the procedure, rejects them, and even the objection of unconstitutionality of GEO 80/2013 regarding the term "services", although the value of the taxes does not refer to any specific service but to the value of the dispute what is a legal aberration that no one sees or has no interest in seeing, the mafia state competing with the services offered by the courts, prosecutor's offices, and the Ministry of Justice to pay the cost of services by imposing taxes that would represent the value of the services but which have nothing to do with the expense for these services, largely grossly abusive mafia law system. The state of fact through these court fees prevents access to justice, and even if the justifiable person has to pay for "the service".
The judge originally invested in the case goes into maternity leave, as the head of the civil section writes, in the closure by which he assigns the case to another, citing a ruling of the Court of Cassation, but which is secret, because it is not forfeited posted publicly.
The consumer asks for details by a request from the Court. Promt is under the signature of the Judge Oprescu Mugurel-Marius , the President of the Court, that the procedure complies with the Courts' Rules of Procedure, and the Head of Civil Division Judge Daradics Oana Mariarespected the procedure by issuing a closure in this respect. I'm eating ... and I'm researching about the boss. I find in her wealth statements a name, Daradics Terezia who borrows the euro with the judge.
I ask the bank all the time in writing who is Daradics Terezia, and the bank spreads. One of BT directors.
The surprise is that the file is legally distributed, even to the President of the Court, even though the portal does not have the contents of the Court, which at the first hearing rejects the unconstitutional objections raised by the applicant, arguing that the Court is not yet invested until the taxes are paid judicially imposed. And if it is not invested why they did not cancel the request and continue the trial !? We will finally see what the new unit will decide. For the time being, he decided to bring the lawsuit at the request of the bank's lawyers and the other consumer who had actually withdrawn part of the amounts promised in the conventions but not in the currency of the credit, but in the currency of the nation, as the bank dictated, cheating with no less 5000 Euro on calculations, and at convention with over 8000 CHF.
Returning to the cause that is not accidentally translated, I am tempted to translate it with excuses, I do not know the language of Voltaire and post it below as the transducer dictated me with small corrections observed and made by me, to document the poor harassed Romanian or European courts and the state mafia. The case treats what we omit - Nullity of the whole contract and not just partial. It also shows that even after the bank has terminated the contract by forced execution, it is responsible before the law and the court, even if the contract is no longer in progress between the original partners.
" Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber)
February 22, 2018 (*)
" preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure - Consumer protection - Directive 93/13 / EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Article 4, paragraph 2 , Article 5 and Article 6 (1) - terms defining the principal subject matter - loan agreement in foreign currency - Scope of the term 'written in a clear and comprehensible manner' - or partial nullity of the contract '
In Case C- 126/17
Reference for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 267 TFEU by Fővárosi Törvényszék (Budapest Capital Court, Hungary), made by decision of 24 February 2017, received at the Court on 10 March 2017,
ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt.
the order in Case (Seventh Chamber),
composed of A. Roses, President of Chambers, and A. C. Toader Prechal (reporter), judges,
Advocate General: N. Wahl,
Judges A. Calot Escobar,
having regard to the written procedure,
after considering the observations submitted
on behalf of : - ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt. By T. Kende, Ügyvéd,
- Ms Czakó, by G. Némethi, ügyvéd,
- the Hungarian Government, Mr MZ Fehér, acting as Agent;
- the Polish Government, by B. Majczyna, acting as Agent,
- the European Commission, by A. Tokár and A. Cleenewerck, of Crayencour, acting as Agents,
Having decided, Advocate General, give its decision by reasoned order in accordance with Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure,
makes this limitation
one request for the reference for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Article 4, paragraph 2 and Article 5 of Directive 93/13 / EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ 1993 L 95, p. 29, p. 29).
2 The reference was made in the course of proceedings between ERSTE Bank Hungary Zrt. (Hereinafter referred to as "the Bank") of Mrs Orsolya Czako (the "Borrower") in respect of an application for a declaration that the terms of the loan agreement between the bank and the debtor are abusive.
European Union law
3 Article 1 of Directive 93/13 provides in paragraph 1:
'The purpose of this Directive is to approximate the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning unfair terms in contracts concluded between a seller or supplier and a consumer contract. '
4 Article 3 (1) of that directive provides:
' A contract term not individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, causes a significant imbalance between the rights and the obligations of the parties to the contract, to the detriment of the consumer. '
5 Article 4 of that directive is worded as follows:
1. Without prejudice to Article 7, the unfairness of a contract term shall be assessed by taking into account the nature of the goods or services for which the contract was concluded and, at the time of the conclusion of the contract, referring to all the circumstances surrounding the conclusion of the contract and all clauses of the contract or of another contract to which it is subject.
2. The assessment of the unfairness of the clauses does not concern either the definition of the subject-matter of the contract or the appropriateness of price or remuneration on the part of the services or the goods supplied in exchange for them, on the other, inasmuch as those clauses are expressed clearly and intelligibly. '
6 Article 5 of that directive provides:
"In the case of contracts where all or part of the clauses are presented to the consumer in writing, they must always be drafted in clear and comprehensible language. Where there are doubts as to the meaning of a clause, the most favorable interpretation for consumer. [...] »
7 Article 6 (1) of Directive 93/13 provides:
'Member States shall provide that unfair terms used in a contract concluded with a consumer by a seller or supplier in accordance with the law does not create obligations for the consumer and the contract continues to commit the parties through these clauses, if it can continue to exist without the unfair terms. "
8 Article 200 of the Polgári Törvénykönyvről szóló 1959. evi IV. törvény (Law No 1959 on the establishment of the Civil Code), in its version in force until 15 March 2014, stated:
(2) A contract that violates or circumvents a rule of law is null and void, unless the rule provides for another legal consequence. Any contract that is manifestly contrary to morality is equally invalid. "
Law on credit institutions and financial undertakings
9 Pursuant to Article 213 of the Hitelintézetekről és a penzügyi vállalkozásokról szóló 1996. evi CXII. Törvény (Law No CXII of 1996 on Credit Institutions and Financial Undertakings):
"(1) A credit loan or a loan agreement for housing which does not indicate
(a) the contract,
(e) the number and depreciation and their due dates,
(3) Avoidance the contract may be invoked only in the interest of the consumer.
The dispute in the main proceedings and the questions referred for a preliminary ruling
10 On 14 June 2007, the debtor entered into a mortgage credit agreement with the Swiss franc (CHF)
11 Fővárosi Törvényszék (Budapest Capital Court, Hungary) provides that according to item I / 1 of this contract, the bank has provided the borrower with a CHF 64 731 loan "in terms of safe financing. The grant application, on which the loan was based , amounts to HUF 8 280 000which the bank recorded in Swiss francs. According to this I / 1, the borrower agreed that the amount of currency denominated in the loan, either due to exchange rate fluctuations occurring between the contract date and the release date, increased by 15% compared to the application for funding . This point also provided that the amount indicated in Swiss francs was only indicative, the actual amount of the current credit being determined subsequently in accordance with point II / 1 of the contract.
12 According to that last point, the amount awarded by the bank could not exceed the amount expressed in the Hungarian forint provided for in point I / 1 of that contract but was to be entered in Swiss francs. The amount expressed in this currency had to be calculated by applying the intraday purchase exchange rate in effect at the date of issue as applied by the bank under the conditions and, finally,
13 Paragraph I / 4 of the contract in question provided, inter alia, that in order to resolve any dispute relating to the settlement of the loan or to grant a requirement to the bank to determine the outstanding amount of the credit or any other debt, have expressed their willingness to accept as authenticated evidence an act in the authentic form drawn up on the basis of books and accounting records of the bank.
14 On 15 August 2013, the bank terminated the loan agreement in question and initiated enforcement proceedings against the debtor for the purpose of recovering outstanding amounts of the loan.According to a notarial act drafted on the same date, the bank granted a CHF 64,731 loan under this contract. According to the order issued on 23 December 2013 by the bailiff responsible for this execution, the principal amount was CHF 56 414.80 .
15 The Borrower appealed against this forced execution on the grounds that the purpose of the loan agreement, namely the amount of the loan and the amortization periods, is not clearly determined. He considers that, for this reason, the contract must be declared invalid . In addition, this contract does not include an indication of annual interest rate (RAP) or interest rate.
16 The Borrower also invoked the nullity of point I / 4 of the contract in question on the ground that that clause on the basis of which the bank could unilaterally determine the amount to be paid by the debtor could be abusive.
17 The referring court states that, according to the bank, the subject-matter of the contract in question, namely the amount of the loan expressed in Swiss francs, was sufficiently clear. Point I / 1 of this agreement provided that the borrower requested the bank to satisfy a request for financing for a fixed amount in Hungarian forint, which would then be converted into a foreign currency on the basis of the loan rate. effective change at the time the funds are released.
18The Court of First Instance found that the contract in question was invalid on the ground that it was not validly concluded. Consequently, the instinct considered that the legal conditions had not been met. According to that court, the contractual provisions in question do not determine the amount actually paid by the bank, since it only exposed the amount in Hungarian forint corresponding to the application for financing and expressed as the amount in foreign currency as an indication.
19 The Bank referred the judgment at first instance to the referring court, claiming, in essence, that thelegal and factual basis of that judgment was incorrect.
20 Thus, the court misinterpreted Kūria's decisions (the Supreme Court, Hungary), from which it follows that a loan in a foreign currency such as the one in question is legal. In this case, the sum expressed in Hungarian forint corresponding to the application, the amount of credit denominated in foreign currency indicated and how to calculate the total amount of the amount paid at the time of the issue of the funds would clearly show the contract in question. The fact that the amount of the loan in foreign currency is not determinable in advance of the amount of the Hungarian forint indicated in the request for financing would result from the changes in the exchange rate.
21 Referring courtshows that the borrower essentially repeats the same arguments as those put forward at first instance. Thus, it recalls that, in its view, the object of the contract does not meet the requirement of clarity required by the legislature for the purpose of consumer protection . The contract does not provide for the exact amount of the loan, neither in the Hungarian forint nor in the foreign currency, the amount in Hungarian forint being only the maximum amount requested by the borrower.
22 In that context, the national court asks whether points I / 1 and II / 1 of the loan agreement in question meet the requirements of clarity and transparency laid down in Article 4 (2) 5 of Directive 93/13, also notes that it is the responsibility of the bank to determine the final amount of the loan on the basis of the data contained in its books. If that were not the case, the referring court asks the legal consequence it has for that, since the clauses in question concern the main object of the contract and can not survive. without these clauses .
23 The Fővárosi Törvényszék (Budapest Court of Appeal) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling:
'(1) For the purposes of determining the value of a loan agreement, a wording such as that in paragraphs I / 1 and II / 1 of the contract at issue indicating the amount of CHF 64 731 as indicative in time includes the sum a maximum of HUF 8280000 the financing request and the link between determining the amount of the credit on a party's legal declaration is covered by the consumer contract as well as the data contained in its terms, it meets the requirements for the clear and comprehensible wording referred to in Article 4 (2) Article 5 of Directive 93/13?
2. If the determination made in paragraphs I / 1 and II / 1 of the contract does not constitute a clear and easily understandable wording, so that it is possible to assess the abusive nature of those clauses - and whether they are abusivehas been retained the nullity of the whole agreement can be found, as in national law, in the determination of the object of the contract is sanctioned by the invalidity of the entire contract?
3) If the contract could be declared valid, could the amount be determined in the most favorable way for the consumer? "
24 Under Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure, where the answer to a question referred for a preliminary ruling can be clearly deduced from the case-law, or where the answer to such a question does not allow reasonable doubt, the Court may at any time, on a proposal from the Judge-Rapporteur, after hearing the Advocate-General, decide to give its decision by reasoned decision.
25 That provision must be applied in the context of the present reference for a preliminary ruling.
The first question
26 By the first questionthe referring court asks, in essence, whether Articles 4 (2) and 5 of Directive 93/13 must be interpreted as satisfying the requirement that the contractual clauses are drafted in a clear and comprehensible manner , the meaning of those provisions, the terms of a loan agreement between a consumer and a bank in a Member State such as the one in question, stating, on the one hand, an amount in the currency of that Member State corresponding to that indicated in the application of the financing of the consumer and, on the other hand, a sum in Swiss francs provided for information by the bank.
27 As a preliminary point, it should be noted thatit is for the national court alone to rule on the classification of terms which are considered unfair according to the circumstances of the case. However, the Court has jurisdiction to deduce from the provisions of Directive 93/13, in this case Article 4 (2) and Article 5 thereof, criteria which the national court may or must apply when reviewing the contractual terms (judgment of 20 September 2017, #Andriciuc cases C-186/16 , EU: C: 2017: 703, paragraph 22 and the case-law cited).
28 It must be borne in mind that the Court has already held that the clear and comprehensible wording required by Article 4 (2)Directive 93/13 applies even where a clause falls within the concept of 'main object of the contract' within the meaning of that provision . Such clauses fail to assess their unfairness only in so far as the competent national court considers, on a case-by-case basis, that they were drafted in a clear and comprehensible manner (judgment of 20 September 2017, #Andriciuc Cases C-186/16, EU: C: 2017: 703, paragraph 43 and the cases cited therein).
29 With regard to the requirement of transparency of contractual clauses, as provided for in Article 4 (2) of Directive 93/13, the Court has stated that that requirement, laid down in Article 5 of that directive, can not be reduced only to an official and grammatical understanding, on the contrary, the system of protection established by that directive is based on the idea that the consumer is in a situation of inferiority in terms of professionalism, in particular as regards the level of information, the requirement of a wording clear and easy to understand the contractual clauses, and therefore the transparency represented by the directive must be understood both (Case 2017, paragraph 2017, paragraph 20, and Case C-186/16 Andriciuc and Others [ and the case-law cited)
30 In the present case, it is apparent from the documents before the Court that the terms of the loan agreement at issue in the main proceedings indicated that the borrower's application for financing was HU 8 280 000, also by the bank for guidance purposes in foreign currency, up to CHF 64 731. In that regard, the bank claims that the amount of the loan, intended to cover the borrower's financing needs, is presented in Swiss francs on a provisional basis, which can not be accurately determined by the date of the loan. the release of funds as a result of exchange rate changes.
31 It should be noted that, by means of a loan agreement, the borrower undertakes principally to make available to the debtor a certain amount of money, the latter essentially reimbursing, as a general interest rule, that amount in accordance with the prescribed time-limits (see, to that effect, Case C-186/16 Andriciuc and Others [ 2017: 703, paragraph 38].
32 In that context, the requirement that contractual clauses such as those at issue must be drafted in a clear and understandable way in order to be understood as requiring the contract to establish transparently the amount of money paid for the debtor's credit by the bank, expressed in foreign currency as an account currency , which must be defined according to the currency of payment . To the extent that the determination of the amount of this loan depends on the exchange rate valid at the date of the issue of the funds,this requirement requires that the mechanism for calculating the total amount borrowed by the bank and the applicable exchange rate be transparent . so that an average consumer, reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and reasonably able to assess, on the basis of precise and comprehensible criteria, the economic consequences of the contract, including, in particular, the total cost of his loan see, to that effect, the judgment of 20 September 2017,Andriciuc and Others , C-186/16, EC: 2017: 703, paragraphs 45 and 47, and the case-law cited).
33 That question must be examined by the referring court in the light of all the relevant facts, which include not only the wording of the clauses but also the information provided by the creditor in the negotiation. the loan agreement (judgment of 20 September 2017, # Andriciuc and Others , C-186/16, EU: C: 2017: 703, paragraph 46 and the case-law cited).
34 In that regard, it must also be pointed out that the information before the conclusion of a contract concerning the contractual conditions and the consequences of that conclusion are of fundamental importance for the consumer. In particular, on the basis of that information, it decides whether it wishes to be linked to the terms previously developed by the trader (Case C-154/15, C-307/15 and C-308/15 Gutierrez Naranjo  , EU: C: 2016: 980, paragraph 50 and the case-law cited).
35 In the light of the foregoing, the answer to the first question must be that Article 4 (2) and Article 5 of Directive 93/13 must be interpreted as satisfying the requirement that the contractual clauses must be drafted in a clear and unambiguous manner for the purposes of these provisions, the terms of a loan agreement concluded between a consumer and a banking establishment in a Member State where the amount of money that the consumer will make in the currency of the consumer as defined in in relation to the currency of payment, is clearly indicated.To the extent that the determination of this amount depends on the exchange rate at the time the funds are issued, this requirement requires that the methods of calculating the amount actually borrowed and the applicable exchange rate be transparent so that 'an average consumer normally informed and reasonably attentive and knowledgeable, can assess, on the basis of precise and comprehensible economic consequences arising from this contract, including, in particular, the total cost of its loan.
on the second question
36 By its second question, the national court asks, in essence, whether Article 6 (1) of Directive 93/13 must be interpreted as meaning that, where a national court finds that the infringement is unfair terms of a loan agreement concluded between a consumer and the bank, as well as those at issue in the main proceedings, that provision precludes the court and declared the invalidity of the contract as a whole.
37 As regards the impact of an unfair finding of the contractual clauses on the validity of the contract at issue, Article 6 (1) of Directive 93/13 provides that the contract is to remain binding on the parties under the same conditions if it can be unconditionally abusive '.
38 In that context, the national courts found thatcontractual clauses are unfair are required by Article 6 (1) of Directive 93/13 in order to attract all relevant consequences. in accordance with national law, so that the consumer is not bound by those provisions and, secondly, to determine whether the contract in question can exist without those unfair terms (Joined Cases C-453 / 10, EU: C: 2012: 144, paragraph 30 and the case-law cited).
39 In the present case, as has already been stated in paragraph 22 of this order, the referring court considers that the clauses at issue are the main object of the loan agreement and that it can not survive without those clauses. If that court finds, having regard in particular to the answer to the first question, the unfairness of the relevant provisions, it would be for it to draw all the consequences in accordance with national law, so that the consumer is not required to comply with those clauses.
40 In such a situation, it follows from the case-law of the Court, cited at paragraphs 37 and 38 of that order, that Article 6 (1) of Directive 93/13 must be interpreted as meaning that there is no objection to the nullity of the contract as a whole. However, if agreement can not survive the elimination of unfair terms, that provision, although prevent the national court to supplement the contract by the content of these clauses does not preclude rules national law to remedy nationalof nullity of clauses judge applies (see, to that effect, on 30 April 2014, and Kasler Káslerné Rabai C-26/13, EU: C: 2014: 282, paragraphs 77 and 85 and the case-law cited).
41In the light of all those considerations, Article 6 (1) of Directive 93/13 must be interpreted as meaning that where a national court finds that the terms of the loan agreement between the consumer and a banking institution, such as those at issue in the main proceedings in the main action, that provision does not prevent that court from declaring the invalidity of that contract as a whole if it can not survive the abolition of those clauses.
The third question
42 By its third question, the national court asks whether it is permissible to determine the amount of the loan most favorably to the consumer if Directive 93/13 precludes the finding of invalidity of the loan agreement overall.
43 In the light of the answer given to the second question, there is no longer any need to answer that question.
44 Since these proceedings are, for the parties to the main proceedings, a step in the action pending before the national court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court. Costs incurred in submitting observations to the Court, other than the costs of those parties, can not be recoverable.
On those grounds, the Court (Seventh Chamber) hereby rules:
(1) Article 4 (2) and Article 5 of Council Directive 93/13 / EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as meaning that: they satisfy the requirement that the contractual clauses must be drafted in a clearly and easily understood, within the meaning of those provisions, of the terms of a loan agreement concluded between a consumer and a banking establishment in a Member State where the amount in the amount of money made available to the consumer in question expressed in foreign currency as a currency account , defined in relation to the payment currency , is clearly indicated. In so far as the determination of this amount depends on the exchange rate valid at the time of the issue of the funds,this requirement requires that the methods of calculating the amount actually borrowed and the applicable exchange rate be transparent so that 'an average consumer, reasonably well informed and reasonably well informed, can assess, on the basis of precise and
2. Is Article 6 (1) of Directive 93/13 to be interpreted as meaning that, where a national court finds that the terms of the contract are, in particular, of a loan agreement concluded between a consumer and a bank such as those at issue in the main proceedings, that provision does not preclude the court from declaring the invalidity of the contract as a whole if it can not survive the abolition of those clauses.
Provisions of Roman legsilation Mr. Piperea and others
In fact, Romanian consumers and not only did not receive the currency of the EURO or CHF after refinancing, the bank violating the law 193/2000 art. 4, the contracts are preformed, not negotiated as one can see the identity between the two conventions and hundreds of thousands identical to the clauses, differing only the amounts of the loan. In particular, the provision by which the professional bank imposes the consumer currency on the currency of the credit, without paying it as it results from the convention, Banca Volskbank Romania SA (hereinafter the bank) violates the provision of art. 1 letter c of the Annex to Law 193/2000
"(C) obliges the consumer to fulfill his contractual obligations, even in situations where the trader has not fulfilled his obligations;"
Legislation encompassing and intro- ducing crediting of the resident Romanian consumer by the resident bank, with money other than legal money on the territory of the country systematically looted:
- Constitution of Romania art 137 of 2. ARTICLE 137 (2) The national currency is the lion , and its subdivision, the money. Under the conditions of accession to the European Union, the circulation and replacement of the national currency with that of the European Union can be recognized by organic law.
- On grounds: LAW no. 82/1991 - Accounting Law, art. Article 3
(1) The accounting shall be in Romanian and in the national currency .
- Law no. 312 of 28 June 2004 on the Statute of the National Bank of Romania Art. 10 The bank issues regulations on the monitoring and control of foreign exchange transactions on the territory of the country and issues authorizations for foreign exchange operations, foreign exchange transactions and other specific operations . Article 48 Regulations of the National Bank of Romania (1) The National Bank of Romania shall be empowered to issue the necessary regulations to enforce and enforce compliance with the legal provisions. (2)The regulations of the National Bank of Romania may be in the form of regulations, orders, norms and circulars, binding on public and private legal entities as well as individuals.
- Thus, the NBR Regulation No. 4 of 2005, which also transposes provisions of the EC Directive regarding the foreign exchange regime in the EU, is clearly stipulated in " Art. 3. - (1) Payments, receipts, transfers and any other such transactions between residents, subject to trade in goods and services is made only in national currency (leu) , except for the operations provided in Annex no. 2 " Categories of residents that may perform foreign currency operations ", which can be performed in foreign currency . "
In SCHEDULE. 1 NOMENCLATOR consumers - resident individuals, can only make currency transactions in the situations described and with occasional character.
Either a credit agreement is not something occasional, and according to legal definitions it is a trade act, as defined in art. 4.7. " Loans and financial loans - financing of any kind granted / received on a contractual basis, including the financing of commercial transactions in which a resident does not participate, and any manner in which the creditor exits or takes over a debtor's obligation towards a third party; this category also includes mortgage loans, consumer loans, and financial leasing operations . "
Or these BNR regulators of terrorist banks claim to have paid the currency to consumers as they invoke the theory of monetary nominalism in the old Civil Code, which required banks to prove that they had illegally paid the "credit currency" "by introducing as the liars claim, in the national monetary territory in foreign currency circulation, is in fact the implicit economic terrorism of unauthorized introduction of foreign banknotes in circulation. The NBR, through changes in foreign exchange regulations, violates not only the Statute but its own regulations as below, which was abrogated in 2010, after the scandal of these illicit and illicit loans had grown.
Order no. 616 of 11.11.1991
Official Gazette, Part I 245 30.noi.1991 repealed without being replaced by another norm of regulation or law in 2010 by REGULATION no.6 of 4 June 2010 on the abrogation of some normative acts issued by the National Bank of Romania
Art. 1. - On the territory of Romania, all receipts, payments and settlements are made only in lei, under the conditions established by the Regulation on Current Transactions and Capital Transfers with Foreign Payment Facilities, issued by the National Bank of Romania and published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, no. 101 of May 13, 1991.
Or, if the Directive does not impose a restriction on the declaration of invalidity of the contract, the Romanian law has provisions which are a legal instrument for establishing the abusive clause, as well as the declaration of the Nullity of the conventions or the new denomination of the absolute nullity of the Civil Code of the liar-deceptive conventions.
And if in Hungary the banks entered the currency of payments in Romania, they find that in conventions the banks lied to the consumers, leaving them to believe that they would receive the currency but actually paid them with the bank's uncertain quotes , consumers also incurring the cost of fictitious exchange, because banks did not have credit coins, actually using an inexistent currency account.
More serious is that invoking the theory of monetary nominalism, the Courts do not even notice the violation of the monetary territory, because the payment in foreign currencies is in fact an introduction into circulation of the foreign currency, for which the commercial banks have no legitimacy, and, on the other hand, argued in the answer to the constable, in fact only fueled the consumer's account with currency, and the lies and the invocation of causes even finally settled on the basis of the consumer's obligation to pay according to the theory of monetary nominalism drops and gives the possibility of REVIEWING the causes.
Here, lawyers, intervenes the same Civil Code from 1848, which obliges the depository bank to return to the depositary that became the LOAN. the currency from the deposit (currency) and not deceive him by requiring him to receive lions, Judge Oprescu and others. And if one of the two consumers did not sign the payment documents, with what right do you refuse, the right to a fair trial imposing irrecoverable court fees? We may make a public subscription to make the hatred of these traitors of the law and the intrusions of the nation. They will interpret the law anyway, just in favor of the banking mafia.
Invoke Nullity of Contract Laws because you have a legal instrument in Law 289/2004 on Consumer Credit Contracts , but you will be forced by Mr. Jude, court fees that he wants his muscles and irresponsibility to respond to the law for abuse of service, respectively judgments. They are not independent as they swore, but depend on the interests and spells they receive from banks either in the form of preferential loans, or in the form that I discovered in the asset declaration of the Chief Chief of Section, loan from one of the bank's directories , probably sister, with the euro.
Take D'aci, National Judge: The Civil Code of 1868 provides in ART 1604
The depositary must return all that he has received.
A deposit of money, when the depositary, according to art. 1602, made use of it, must be returned to those coins in which it was made, both in the case of increase and in the decrease of their value. (Civil Code 1100).
Thank you very much to the friendly consumers in Croatia and Serbia, from Bulgaria. The cover picture represents them, not us. At our associations, they are in the service of the banking mafia and their own interests in the opinion of many.
They are likely to be welcomed by Hrvatskoj and Srbija. The slogan of the progress will represent us, not us. According to our opinion, udruge are in the service of the banking mafia, according to opinion of many.
Thanks in particular to friendly consumers in Croatia and Serbia. The picture of the cover represents us and not us. In our opinion, the associations are in the service of the banking mafia, in the opinion of many.