Swap sin test Mifid: None














Even in cases where the contractor is a company, if they did not test him MiFID, the swap has a good chance of being declared null.

This is the line of case law that has been imposed upon the judgment of the Supreme Court of 20 January 2014.

On this occasion, review the judgment of the Provincial Court of Valencia 25 June 2014.

A corporation signs a financial transaction framework agreement y dos swaps (swap) with Banco de Valencia (Now CaixaBank) in March 2008. Company A, negative settlement will cost the "whopping" of 607.465 euros.

In view of the damage suffered, sues before the Court of First Instance, that dismissed on the ground that there was no error in the consent.

It now presents feature appeal before the Provincial Court alleging error in the evaluation of evidence by attend error excusable, that over time does not ratify contracts, by the Administrator profile is not an "expert" and that the bank, and reported on the client (made no test), ni informó Product properly.

The Court cites criterion for the judgment of the Supreme Court of 20 January 2014: lack of test leads to presume the lack of sufficient knowledge about the product and its risks hired, vitiating consent.

For the hearing:

"The consent must be preceded by information obligations, the bank, and only after they were credited, passes examined the performance of the other party (….)”

I believe that He administrator employed a insurance coverage of interest rates. She had not previously entered into any such contract and test was not brought convenience and suitability test. The recruitment initiative of the bank was, which (STS 20 January 2014 y STJUE 30 May 2013) leads to the conclusion that there was advice, which requires the completion of the suitability test.

Ultimately, the resource estimates, the nullity of states swap contracts signed and ordered restitution of mutual benefits.

Although for a while there was some reluctance on the part of courts to admit error on consent in swaps the swaps, where the contractor was a company, from the Judgment of the Supreme Court of 20 January 2014, It is generally accepted when the test was not made mandatory,

Consult your case now

Leave a Reply


Set as default language
 Edit Translation

Subscribe to receive a book PDF

Just for signing up receive via email the link to download the book "How to change lawyers" en format digital.
Sign up here

Sígueme en Twitter

Subscribe me

* This field is required