In the
first Quarter Practise Review, issued by the Russian Supreme Court in the
mid-February, one can find several decisions on consumer's relationship with
banks or other financial institutions. I have already written a post on one of
them, namely on a 'hardship' clause and modification of a loan contract, made
in foreign currency. Here are the outlines of two others and some general
conclusions...
The blog is about different aspects of Russian private law, namely about the law of real estate, contract law, consumer law, housing law, law on biotechnologies and, finally, family law.
Showing posts with label contract law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label contract law. Show all posts
Monday, 27 February 2017
Wednesday, 22 February 2017
Currency fall is not hardship is Russia
Several
days ago the Supreme Court of Russia issues its first quarterly review
of its most important decisions, which had been made recently (Russian text is available on the official web site). The
eighth judgment was about whether a plummeting fall of Russian currency
because of Crimea crisis could be considered as hardship and thus led to
conversion of a loan contract. The Court unsurprisingly gave a negative
answer, confirming general reluctance to use ‘rebus sic stantibus’
doctrine. However some remarks in the ruling seem to leave a door open
to use this clause as a ground for contract modification…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)