Aleksić: Supreme Court decision is unconstitutional and discriminatory
The Supreme Court of Croatia has issued a binding decision regarding converted Swiss Franc loans, stating that users who accepted the conversion of their loans into euros are not entitled to a refund of overpaid principal amounts. However, the court recognizes their right to claim interest on these overpayments up until September 30, 2015. Goran Aleksić, coordinator of the Franak Association, criticized the ruling as unconstitutional, discriminatory, and contrary to European Union law. He argued that the court’s decision arbitrarily disregards the findings of expert appraisals, which clearly state that overpaid amounts were not included in the loan conversions. Aleksić expects many borrowers to exhaust legal remedies and potentially file constitutional complaints. He highlighted the dissenting opinions of four judges, who emphasized the inequality among consumers and questioned whether overpaid amounts were indeed covered by the loan conversion. Lawyer Mićo Ljubenko noted that the new ruling is unlikely to deter those already involved in legal proceedings, as they are accustomed to changing judicial positions and appeals.
The long-awaited ruling by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia in the case involving Swiss Franc loans has finally been delivered, marking a pivotal moment in one of the most significant financial disputes in Croatian history. The court ruled that consumers who converted their Swiss Franc loans into euros have no right to reclaim the principal amount paid due to unfair contract terms, but they are entitled to interest on the overpaid amounts up until the date of conversion—specifically, from the signing of the loan agreement to the end of the obligation via the conversion, which was completed by September 30, 2015. This decision clarifies the rights of tens of thousands of citizens who had converted their loans and opens a new chapter in the multi-year legal battle between banks and debtors.
According to the Union Franak, as stated on its Facebook page, the ruling was reached by a vote of nine to four. This outcome highlights the complexity of the issue and the differing interpretations among judges regarding the fairness and legality of the contractual clauses in question. The Supreme Court's decision addresses the long-standing uncertainty surrounding the rights of borrowers who had taken out loans in Swiss Francs and later converted them into euros, a move that many believed would grant them full compensation for overpayments made under unfair conditions.
The ruling comes after years of inconsistent judicial practices, where different courts issued varying decisions on similar cases. The expanded panel of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia had previously announced in late May of this year that a ruling on the so-called “converted Swiss Franc loans” would soon be issued, emphasizing that once finalized, the public would be informed through a special announcement.
Before the hearing, a public debate had already emerged, with the banking sector advocating for the recognition of only interest claims, while the Union Franak argued that consumers were entitled to the return of the principal amount as well. This divergence in perspectives underscored the deep divide between financial institutions and consumer advocates, each presenting their arguments based on different interpretations of legal principles and consumer protection laws.
The Supreme Court’s decision, now officially published, states that users of Swiss Franc loans who accepted the conversion into euros do not have the right to claim back the overpaid amounts. However, they are recognized as having a right to interest on these overpaid sums up until the day of conversion, specifically for the period from the signing of the loan agreement to the completion of the obligation through the conversion, which ended on September 30, 2015. These interest payments are considered in full and are not reduced by the amount of overpayment determined during the conversion process.
The Union Franak expressed strong disappointment with the ruling, calling it unconstitutional, discriminatory, and contrary to both the European Convention on Human Rights and the Croatian Constitution. They emphasized that consumers who converted their loans ended up paying 20 to 30 percent more than those who did not convert, yet remain fully compensated. According to the union, affected consumers will have to resort to constitutional complaints to resolve their issues before the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia.
Four judges submitted dissenting opinions, arguing that consumers should have the right to reclaim the amounts unjustly collected by banks due to the application of unfair contract terms related to variable interest rates and foreign currency clauses in Swiss Franc loans. These dissenting views could play a crucial role in future constitutional proceedings, especially given that interest constitutes only 20 percent of the total compensation claimed by consumers.
The Supreme Court’s ruling has sparked further reactions from political parties and advocacy groups, many of whom have criticized the decision as unjust and detrimental to the rights of ordinary citizens. The Most group, for instance, expressed deep concern about the implications of the ruling, stating that it effectively denied hundreds of thousands of Croatian citizens the right to full reimbursement of funds they had been charged for years based on unfair contract terms. They also highlighted the professionalism and integrity of Judge Jadranko Jug, who submitted a detailed and legally sound dissenting opinion despite facing intense public pressure and criticism for his stance on the matter.
The Union Franak has announced plans to file individual constitutional complaints to challenge the Supreme Court’s ruling and secure full compensation for consumers who took out Swiss Franc loans. They argue that the ruling contradicts both Croatian law and European Union regulations, particularly the rulings of the European Court of Justice, which have consistently held that contracts containing unfair foreign currency clauses are entirely invalid. The union believes that the Supreme Court’s decision fails to recognize the fundamental principle of fairness and justice, placing consumers in an unequal position compared to those who did not convert their loans or those who obtained original euro loans.
As the legal battle continues, the focus shifts to the potential involvement of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia and possibly even the European Court of Human Rights. The Union Franak remains confident that the Constitutional Court will ultimately rule in favor of consumers, citing the precedent set in previous collective lawsuits against banks, where the Supreme Court revised its stance following intervention by the Constitutional Court. This historical context provides hope that a similar resolution might occur in the current case, ensuring that the rights of Croatian consumers are upheld according to both national and international standards of justice.
21 reports
Index.hrIndependentCenterFactual 99Objective 8515 days ago
The Supreme Court of Croatia has ruled on the case involving Swiss franc loans converted by consumers. According to the ruling, borrowers who converted their CHF loans do not have the right to a full refund of overpaid amounts but are entitled to interest on those overpayments up until the conversion date, which was September 30, 2015. The decision was made in an expanded session with three detailed dissenting opinions criticizing the majority ruling. This follows a period of inconsistent judicial practice regarding these cases.
Bias read (Center): The article provides a factual summary of a legal ruling without apparent ideological framing. It reports on a court decision and mentions differing judicial interpretations but does not take a stance or use biased language.
Why these scores (Factual 99 · Objective 85): Extremely accurate in reporting the court's decision and the minority opinions. The tone is largely neutral and balanced, providing context from both sides.
Jutarnji listIndependentCenterFactual 99Objective 8015 days ago
The Supreme Court of Croatia has ruled that borrowers who converted Swiss franc loans do not have the right to reclaim the principal amount under the penalty clauses, but they are entitled to interest charges up to the date of conversion, which was September 30, 2015. The ruling confirms that these interest charges are fully applicable and not reduced by the penalty amounts determined during the conversion. The decision was made by a vote of 9 to 4, according to the Frank Association's Facebook page. This ruling clarifies the rights of tens of thousands of Croatian citizens who converted their
Bias read (Center): The article presents a legal ruling without overtly favoring any political side. It focuses on the legal interpretation and implications of the court's decision regarding loan conversions, without using biased language or selectively presenting information.
Why these scores (Factual 99 · Objective 80): Extremely accurate in reporting the court's decision and the minority opinions. The tone is neutral and provides context from both sides.
HRT (Hrvatska radiotelevizija)State / PublicCenterFactual 98Objective 8015 days ago
The Supreme Court has ruled that users who accepted the conversion of their Swiss Franc (CHF) loans into euros do not have the right to reclaim overpaid amounts. However, they are entitled to interest on those overpaid amounts up until September 30, 2015—the date of the conversion. The court emphasized that these interest claims apply to all payments made above the original exchange rate and initial interest rate, based on unfair clauses in the loan agreements.
Bias read (Center): The article reports on a legal ruling by the Supreme Court regarding financial terms of converted credit agreements. It presents the court’s decision without overtly favoring any side, using neutral language and citing the court's official statement directly. There is no evident framing bias or slan
Why these scores (Factual 98 · Objective 80): Very accurate in reporting the court's decision and its details. The tone remains neutral and factual, presenting both sides without overt bias.
N1 HrvatskaIndependentLeftFactual 98Objective 7515 days ago
The Supreme Court of Croatia has issued a legal interpretation stating that users who converted their Swiss franc loans into euros do not have the right to additional compensation based on unfair contract terms. The organization 'Most' has criticized this decision, calling it unjust and expressing concern over its impact on citizens who have been involved in lengthy legal disputes with banks. They argue that the ruling creates an absurd legal situation where citizens are entitled to interest on illegally charged amounts but not the return of those amounts themselves.
Bias read (Left): The article presents criticism of the Supreme Court's decision from the perspective of 'Most,' which frames the ruling as unjust and highlights concerns about fairness and legal logic. The language used emphasizes the perceived injustice toward citizens and questions the court's conclusion, aligning
Why these scores (Factual 98 · Objective 75): Highly accurate in reporting the court's decision and the minority opinions. The tone is somewhat critical of the majority decision but remains relatively balanced.
N1 HrvatskaIndependentCenterFactual 97Objective 7515 days ago
The Supreme Court has ruled that users who converted their Swiss franc loans into euros do not have the right to reclaim overpaid principal amounts resulting from unfair contract terms. However, they are entitled to interest on the overpaid amounts up to the conversion date, which was September 30, 2015. The ruling was made by an expanded panel of the Supreme Court, with three dissenting opinions criticizing the majority's stance. The decision ends a long period of uncertainty as Croatian courts had previously issued varying rulings on similar cases. The banking sector supported the court's认定,
Bias read (Center): The article presents the Supreme Court's ruling without overtly favoring either the banking sector or consumer advocacy groups. It includes both perspectives—mentioning the banking sector's support and the consumer group Franak's position—without emphasizing one side over the other. The language is
Why these scores (Factual 97 · Objective 75): Accurate in describing the court ruling and the minority opinions. The article leans slightly towards the consumer advocates but maintains a mostly objective tone.
Novi listIndependentLeftFactual 97Objective 6014 days ago
The article reports that Goran Aleksić, coordinator of the economic-law team at the association Franak, stated that the decision by the Supreme Court regarding converted Swiss franc loans is contrary to EU law and Croatian constitutional law. The court ruled that consumers who converted their Swiss franc loans into euros are only entitled to interest accrued up to the conversion date, not the overpaid amounts still held by banks. Aleksić announced plans to file constitutional complaints to ensure full compensation for consumers.
Bias read (Left): The article presents the stance of a consumer advocacy group (Franak), which is likely aligned with progressive interests, criticizing a judicial decision as being against EU law and Croatian constitutional principles. The framing emphasizes the potential harm to consumers and highlights the group’s
Why these scores (Factual 97 · Objective 60): Accurate in reporting the court's decision and Udruga Franak's response. The article exhibits a clear bias in favor of Udruga Franak, using emotionally charged language.
Net.hrIndependentLeftFactual 96Objective 6015 days ago
The Supreme Court has ruled that consumers who converted Swiss franc loans have the right to interest charges on overpayments up to the conversion date but not the return of the principal overpayment. Goran Aleksić criticized the decision as unlawful, unconstitutional, and discriminatory. Four judges issued dissenting opinions, which he praised as honest but noted they were in the minority.
Bias read (Left): The article presents criticism of the court ruling by a representative of a civil society organization, using strong negative terms like 'unlawful,' 'unconstitutional,' and 'discriminatory.' The framing emphasizes the dissenting opinion as more just, while portraying the majority decision as flawed.
Why these scores (Factual 96 · Objective 60): Highly accurate in detailing the court's decision and the minority opinions. The article shows a clear bias in favor of Udruga Franak, using emotionally charged language such as 'nezakonitim', 'protuustavnim', and 'diskriminacijskim'.
HRT (Hrvatska radiotelevizija)State / PublicLeftFactual 95Objective 6514 days ago
The Supreme Court of Croatia has issued a decision regarding converted Swiss franc loans into euros, leading to conflicting reactions. Goran Aleksić from the Franak Association called the ruling unlawful and contrary to European law, while the Croatian Banking Association warned that challenging the decision undermines legal certainty and trust in the judiciary. Minister of Justice Damir Habijan also commented on the ruling.
Bias read (Left): The article presents the ruling as controversial and highlights criticism from left-leaning organizations like Franak, which frames the court’s decision as arbitrary and discriminatory. The emphasis on European Union law and human rights conventions aligns with progressive perspectives. While the HU
Why these scores (Factual 95 · Objective 65): High factual accuracy regarding the court's decision and Udruga Franak's stance. The article clearly favors Udruga Franak's position with strong language and lacks neutrality.
Net.hrIndependentLeftFactual 95Objective 6514 days ago
The Croatian legal association Franak announced plans to file constitutional lawsuits against a decision by the Supreme Court regarding converted Swiss franc loans. The court ruled that consumers who converted their Swiss franc loans into euros are only entitled to interest accrued up to the conversion date, not the full overpaid amounts still held by banks. Franak's coordinator, Goran Aleksić, stated the ruling contradicts EU law, Croatian law, and human rights conventions, calling it arbitrary and discriminatory.
Bias read (Left): The article presents the legal challenge by Franak as a defense of consumer rights and alignment with EU and international law, using terms like 'arbitrary,' 'discriminatory,' and emphasizing the violation of human rights conventions. It frames the Supreme Court’s decision as unjust and out of step,
Why these scores (Factual 95 · Objective 65): High factual accuracy aligning with cross-source consensus on the court decision and Udruga Franak's response. However, the article has a clear bias favoring Udruga Franak's perspective, using strong language like 'protivna pravu EU-a', 'arbitrarna', and 'diskriminacijska'.
Večernji listIndependentCenterFactual 88Objective 7215 days ago
The Constitutional Court has issued a new decision regarding the 'Swiss franc' cases, where consumers who converted their Swiss franc loans into euros are only entitled to a refund of interest charges, not the principal amount they overpaid. Four out of five judges dissented, with some citing potential conflicts of interest involving family members of the judges.
Bias read (Center): The article presents the court's decision and the dissenting opinions without overtly favoring either side. It includes details about the legal arguments and the judges' positions but does not exhibit clear bias toward consumers or banks.
Why these scores (Factual 88 · Objective 72): This article provides clear facts about the court ruling and includes specific details about dissenting opinions and potential conflicts of interest among judges. It maintains a slightly more neutral tone than the first article but still shows some bias in framing the issue.
N1 HrvatskaIndependentCenterFactual 85Objective 7515 days ago
Banks in Croatia have expressed dissatisfaction with a recent ruling by the Constitutional Court regarding Swiss franc (CHF) loans. The court ruled that former users of CHF loans who underwent legal conversion are entitled to compensation for interest paid on higher amounts up to the date of conversion. The Croatian Banking Association (HUB) stated this stance raises questions about legal certainty and deviates from the purpose of the 2015 law, which aimed to systematically resolve the issue of CHF loans. The government emphasized at the time that the law was an extraordinary and one-time干预 to
Bias read (Center): The article presents the positions of both the banks and the government without overtly favoring one side. It includes direct quotes from the Croatian Banking Association and references the government's original intent behind the 2015 law. There is no clear editorializing or biased language.
Why these scores (Factual 85 · Objective 75): The article presents facts accurately based on statements from the Croatian Banking Association (HUB) regarding the Supreme Court's ruling on CHF loans. It quotes HUB's position and provides context about the 2015 law. However, it leans slightly toward the banks' perspective by emphasizing their con
Jutarnji listIndependentLeftFactual 85Objective 7014 days ago
The coordinator of the economic-law team at the NGO Franak, Goran Aleksić, stated that the Supreme Court's decision regarding converted Swiss franc loans is contrary to EU law and announced plans to file constitutional complaints. The decision, made by an expanded panel of the Supreme Court with a vote of 9:4, grants consumers who converted their Swiss franc loans into euros only the right to interest accrued up to the conversion date, excluding any overpaid amounts still held by banks. Aleksić argued that this ruling contradicts Croatian law, EU law, the Croatian Constitution, and the Human-R
Bias read (Left): The article presents the ruling as being against EU law, Croatian law, and human rights conventions, using strong language such as 'arbitrary' and 'discriminatory.' It emphasizes the potential for constitutional challenges and frames the court’s decision as unjust and legally flawed, without giving
Why these scores (Factual 85 · Objective 70): The article presents detailed information about the court decision and quotes directly from Goran Aleksić, making it largely factual. However, it leans toward the plaintiffs' perspective, using strong language like 'arbitraria i diskriminacijska' which may affect objectivity.
Telegram.hrIndependentLeftFactual 85Objective 6514 days ago
Goran Aleksić, coordinator of the economic-law team at the association Franak, announced plans to file constitutional complaints against a decision by the Supreme Court regarding converted Swiss franc loans. The court ruled that consumers who converted their Swiss franc loans into euros are only entitled to interest accrued up to the conversion date, excluding any remaining overpaid amounts held by banks. Aleksić criticized the ruling as arbitrary and discriminatory, claiming it violates Croatian and European law.
Bias read (Left): The article frames the Supreme Court's decision as arbitrary and discriminatory, using strong negative adjectives like 'arbitrarna' and 'diskriminacijska.' It presents the claim from the perspective of the association Franak without balancing with opposing legal arguments or counterpoints from the法院
Why these scores (Factual 85 · Objective 65): The article presents facts accurately based on the statements from Goran Aleksić of Udruge Franak regarding the constitutional challenge to the Supreme Court decision. However, it leans toward the perspective of the group challenging the ruling, using terms like 'arbitrarna' and 'diskriminacijska,'
Index.hrIndependentCenterFactual 80Objective 6014 days ago
Informatički stručnjak Marko Rakar je u Index Studiju komentirao presudu Vrhovnog suda o švicarskom franku, prema kojoj potrošači koji su konvertirali kredite u švicarskim francima imaju pravo na isplatu zateznih kamata, ali ne i na povrat preplaćene glavnice. Rakar je odluku smatrao pogrešnom, nezakonitom i protuustavnom, sugerirajući da bi se borba za obeštećenje mogla produžiti na Ustavni sud ili Europski sud za ljudska prava. Također je objasnio kako je nastala 'Druga fundacija', trgovačko društvo koje se bavi pitanjem švicarskog franka.
Bias read (Center): The article presents an interview with an expert who critiques a court decision regarding Swiss franc loans. The framing is neutral, presenting the expert's opinion without overtly favoring any political side. There is no evident slant in language, sourcing, or emphasis.
Why these scores (Factual 80 · Objective 60): The article includes direct quotes from Marko Rakar but frames the Supreme Court decision as incorrect and unconstitutional, showing a clear bias in favor of those seeking compensation. It lacks balance by not presenting opposing viewpoints.
Telegram.hrIndependentLeftFactual 75Objective 6015 days ago
Goran Aleksić, coordinator of the economic-law team at the Franak Association, criticized a ruling by the Supreme Court regarding Swiss franc loans converted to euros. He called the decision unconstitutional, arbitrary, and discriminatory, arguing it violates Croatian law, EU law, and human rights conventions. Aleksić stated that consumers who converted their loans faced higher repayment costs compared to those who did not convert but received compensation.
Bias read (Left): The article presents strong criticism of a court ruling from a legal expert aligned with consumer advocacy groups. The framing emphasizes the ruling as unconstitutional, arbitrary, and discriminatory, using emotionally charged terms like 'katastrofalnom' (catastrophic), which suggests a clear stance
Why these scores (Factual 75 · Objective 60): The article presents claims from Goran Aleksić regarding the court decision being unconstitutional and discriminatory, but does not provide independent verification of these legal arguments. The factual content aligns with other reports about the ruling and the response from the association, but lac
Index.hrIndependentCenterFactual 75Objective 6015 days ago
Marko Rakar, informatički stručnjak, komentirao je presudu Vrhovnog suda Republike Hrvatske (VSRH) o konverziji švicarskih franca (CHF) kredita. Prema odluci, potrošači koji su konvertirali kredite u švicarskim francima imaju pravo na isplatu zateznih kamata na preplaćene iznose do dana konverzije, ali ne i na povrat preplaćene glavnice. Rakar ocjenjuje odluku kao pogrešnu, nezakonitu, protuustavnu i protivnu pravu EU.
Bias read (Center): The article discusses a legal decision by the Supreme Court regarding currency conversion and compensation claims. The content focuses on legal interpretations and expert opinions without overtly favoring any political side. The framing remains neutral, presenting the court's ruling and Rakar's批评 as
Why these scores (Factual 75 · Objective 60): The article presents Rakar's legal critique but uses strong, emotionally charged language that affects neutrality.
N1 HrvatskaIndependentLeftFactual 70Objective 5515 days ago
Goran Aleksić, coordinator of the economic-law team at the Franak association, criticized the decision of the Supreme Court regarding credit agreements denominated in Swiss francs ('švicarci') converted into euros. He argued that the court's ruling contradicts Croatian laws, European regulations, international conventions, and previous court decisions. Aleksić described the ruling as arbitrary and discriminatory, claiming it was made based on political considerations rather than legal expertise. He praised four judges who issued dissenting opinions and suggested their views could serve as a依据
Bias read (Left): The article presents strong criticism of the Supreme Court's ruling, accusing it of being politically motivated and legally unjust. The framing emphasizes the illegality and immorality of the decision while highlighting dissenting opinions as valid arguments against the ruling. This suggests a clear
Why these scores (Factual 70 · Objective 55): The article presents Aleksić's criticism of the court's decision but uses emotionally charged language like 'svojevoljna' and 'diskriminirajuća', which affects objectivity.
HRT (Hrvatska radiotelevizija)State / PublicLeft11 days ago
The Supreme Court of Croatia has issued a binding decision regarding converted Swiss Franc loans, stating that users who accepted the conversion of their loans into euros are not entitled to a refund of overpaid principal amounts. However, the court recognizes their right to claim interest on these overpayments up until September 30, 2015. Goran Aleksić, coordinator of the Franak Association, criticized the ruling as unconstitutional, discriminatory, and contrary to European Union law. He argued that the court’s decision arbitrarily disregards the findings of expert appraisals, which clearly state that overpaid amounts were not included in the loan conversions. Aleksić expects many borrowers to exhaust legal remedies and potentially file constitutional complaints. He highlighted the dissenting opinions of four judges, who emphasized the inequality among consumers and questioned whether overpaid amounts were indeed covered by the loan conversion. Lawyer Mićo Ljubenko noted that the new ruling is unlikely to deter those already involved in legal proceedings, as they are accustomed to changing judicial positions and appeals.
Bias read (Left): The article presents criticism of the Supreme Court's decision from a civil rights perspective, emphasizing potential constitutional violations and discrimination against consumers. The framing highlights concerns about the judiciary's alignment with EU law and the rights of individuals, suggestinga
Goran Aleksić, koordinator Udruge Franak, je u intervjuu za HRT tvrdio da će odluka Vrhovnog suda o konverziji kredita iz švicarskih franaka u eure biti poništena Ustavnim sudom jer je 'arbitrarna i diskriminacijska'. Prema Aleksiću, potrošači imaju pravo na puno obeštećenje, a Ustavni sud će preispitati odluku Vrhovnog suda do kraja 2023. Aleksić je naveo da četiri suda Vrhovnog suda su izrazila zabrinutost oko nedostatka pravne osnove za odluku i da su upozorili na nedostatak pravne ravnopravnosti potrošača. Udruga Franak planira dogovor s odvjetnicama da ne naplaćuju troškove tužbenih postupaka dok se slučaj ne završi na Ustavnom sudu.
Bias read (Left): The article presents a strong critique of the Supreme Court’s decision, using terms like 'arbitrary' and 'discriminatory,' and emphasizes the rights of consumers and alignment with European Union law. The framing suggests skepticism toward the current judicial ruling and advocacy for a more consumer
Goran Aleksić, coordinator of the Franak Association, has stated his belief that the Supreme Court's decision regarding Swiss franc loans will be overturned by the Constitutional Court, calling it 'arbitrary and discriminatory.' He argues that the ruling contradicts the constitution and European law, and he urges consumers to file constitutional complaints. Aleksić highlights concerns raised by four judges of the Supreme Court, who noted that the conversion did not address the negative effects of the loan terms and failed to resolve the issue of refunding overpaid amounts. He criticizes the majority decision by the expanded bench of the Supreme Court, stating that the judges' ruling conflicts with mathematical logic. Aleksić acknowledges the costs involved in filing constitutional claims but suggests that legal professionals might agree to defer charges until the Constitutional Court reaches a conclusion. He also emphasizes the need to apply European Union principles regarding court costs, arguing that consumers should not bear these expenses if they prove the unfairness of contractual terms.
Bias read (Left): The article presents the views of a representative from an advocacy group critical of the Supreme Court's decision, using strong language such as 'arbitrary and discriminatory' and emphasizing the need for constitutional challenges. The framing focuses on consumer rights and perceived judicial bias,
★
Keep the news honest.
ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.
Croatia
