TFL Vsebine / Revija Javna uprava

V pravu EU se pravna vprašanja potrošniških kreditov ne izčrpajo samo z vprašanjem nedopustnih določb v pogodbah s potrošniki, ki so povezane s predpogodbenimi pojasnilnimi dolžnostmi. Avtorja zastopa stališče, da so predpogodbene pojasnilne dolžnosti vsebovane že od vsega začetka v pravu EU, ter kritično analizirata drugačno stališča Vrhovnega sodišča RS. Zato najprej podata pregled zakonodaje in sodne prakse na ravni EU o varstvu potrošnikov in poudarita dolžnosti slovenske javne uprave pri izvajanju evropskega prava varstva potrošnikov. Pri tem analizirata zlasti načela nacionalne procesne avtonomije, načelo enakovrednosti in učinkovitosti. Nato pa analizirata tipično javnopravna vprašanja, kot je dopustnost upravnih sankcij (prekrški) v zvezi s krediti v švicarskih frankih. To vprašanje je Sodišče EU obravnavalo v zadevi Horžić. Zaradi posebnosti dejanskega stanja te zadeve hrvaška zakonodaja o prekrških ni nasprotovala pravu EU. V nadaljevanju avtorja obravnavata vprašanje, ali omejitve dajanja kreditov v tujih valutah vplivajo na prost pretok storitev in kapitala. To vprašanje je Sodišče EU obravnavalo v zadevi Milivojević, v kateri je ugotovilo, da hrvaška zakonodaja o pogojevanju dajanja kreditov s predhodnim dovoljenjem hrvaških organov nasprotuje pravu EU, saj gre za navaden ekonomski razlog prepovedi, za katerega ni upravičila v pravu EU. Avtorja članek skleneta z obravnavo slovenske problematike zakona o varstvu kreditojemalcev kreditov v švicarskih frankih, saj je Evropska centralna banka že opozorila, da tak zakon ni v skladu s pravom EU, ker učinkuje retroaktivno in ne omogoča pravične porazdelitve bremen med kreditodajalci in kreditojemalci.

In EU law, legal issues of consumer credit are not limited to question of unfair terms in consumer contracts linked to various aspects of pre-contractual information duties. The authors argue that pre-contractual information duties are part of EU law since the adoption of consumer protection directives, and critically assess a different legal opinion of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia. The authors first provide an overview of legislation and case law on consumer protection on the EU level and emphasize the duty of the Slovenian public administration to implement European consumer protection law. In doing so, in particular the assessment of principles of national procedural autonomy, equivalence and efficiency is provided in the article. In the continuation, typical public law issues, such as the admissibility of administrative sanctions (offences) concerning consumer loans in Swiss francs are assessed. The Court of Justice of the EU dealt with the question of such administrative sanction in the Horžić case. Due to the peculiarity of the facts of this case, Croatian legislation did not infringe EU law. The authors continue with the question of whether restrictions on offering loans in foreign currencies adversely affect rights to free movement of services and capital. The Court of Justice of the EU adjudicated on the issue in the Milivojević case and found that Croatian legislation conditioning granting of loans with a prior license issued by Croatian authorities infringed EU law as it was based solely on an economic reason lacking any justification in EU law for such a prohibition. In the end, the authors address Slovene issues on the draft Law on Protection of Borrowers of Loans in Swiss Francs, as the European Central Bank has already warned that such a law is incompatible with EU law, as it has retroactive effect and does not allow a fair burden sharing between creditors and borrowers.

EU Law and Regulatory and Public Law Aspects of Consumer Credits in Swiss Francs