Neigiamos palūkanos kredito teisiniuose santykiuose sutarties laisvės principo ribų kontekste
Mykolo Romerio universitetas |
| Date |
|---|
2021 |
Straipsnyje analizuojama naujausia kasacinio teismo praktika, kurioje išaiškinta, jog kredito sutarties šalys gali susitarti, kad esant neigiamoms palūkanoms kredito sutartis taps neatlygintinė ar net pareiga atlyginti bus perkelta kredito davėjui, t. y. šis turės mokėti atlygį kredito gavėjui už tai, kad kredito gavėjas skolinasi pinigus. Toks teismo itin plečiamas sutarties laisvės principo aiškinimas yra kritikuotinas.
This article critically assesses the newest case law on credit contracts of the Supreme Court of Lithuania. This case law states that freedom of contract allows for the parties of a credit contract to conclude gratuitous credit agreements or even to put the obligation of renumeration upon the lender in cases of negative floating interest rate. However, according to the doctrine of contract law and some examples of comparative case law, conclusions made by the Supreme Court of Lithuania are questionable. It is rather hard to justify the placement of the main obligation of lendee upon the lender based on the principle of freedom of contract alone. Such reversal of this obligation contradicts the main feature of non-gratuitous loan contracts (renumeration for the loan). Since interpretation of contracts in Lithuanian contract law is based upon subjective approach, it is impossible to conclude, that the parties of loan agreements concluded before 2015 could have reasonably foreseen a negative floating interest rate and had a “meeting of minds” that on this extremely rare occasion the lender would remunerate the lendee for usage of the loan.