Santander Securities: New nullity in Valencia

valores santander


The Provincial Court of Valencia has confirmed the nullity of a subscription of "Valores Santander" in its judgment of 6 May 2016.


The Court of First Instance No. 5 Valencia estimated demand in sentence 26 October 2015 and he declared the nullity of the purchase contract "Convertible Securities Santander" signed in September 2007, por valor de 30.000 euros.

The judgment granted the application based on the following reasons:

1.- Lack of information: the product would become actions, It is complex, el cliente es minorista y hubo asesoramiento por el banco.

2.- There was error in the consent, It is presumed by the lack of information. This error is essential and excusable. El tríptico no proporcionaba una información clara y precisa. Also, stated that "It does not contain all the terms and conditions of the issue or describe exhaustively the terms to which it refers. reading the note values ​​recommended ". Neither the summary nor the full prospectus has to be handed over.

3.- The error was invincible, as a result of breach of duty of disclosure by the bank.

The Bank appealed, citing lack of motivation and incongruity of the judgment, misapplication of the burden of proof, contrary to the doctrine of the Supreme Court in this regard, lack of lack of consent, lack of diligence investor, cumplimiento de las obligaciones por la entidad financiera y confirmación parcial y actos propios por la demandante.

La Sala descarta la falta de motivación y la incongruencia omisiva de la sentencia pues no es exigible una respuesta pormenorizada a todas las alegaciones jurídicas expuestas por cada una de las partes.

As to The burden of proof, It is the Bank who must bear the consequences arising from the lack of it (SAP Sixth section 26 May 2015 and STS 25 February 2016).

For measurement, the "Valores Santander" They had different characteristics, depending on whether or not arrived acquire ABN Amro through the OPA. They had no guaranteed capital and is a complex product.

For the assessment of the error excusability, They should take into account the circumstances of the Contracting: the lower their experience and prior knowledge, greater effort must be professional:

"To ensure that it has fully understood the characteristics of the product and the risk assumed investment if you decide to formalize".

The mentions predisposed by the bank on being informed, no effect al estar vacías de contenido y haber sido predispuestas por el profesional (STS 12 January 2015).

In the triptych it was not informed about the risk factors that did appear in the securities note and not reported the risk of not being able to recover the investment in full.

The information in the same "It is interested and biased, not warned of the risks ". Y a mayor abundamiento, in the case established that the triptych was presented at the same time of subscription, namely, without sufficient advance so that the client could read it and make an informed decision.

No evidence that pre-contractual information give himself some.

The Bank was not limited to market the product, sino que fue ofrecido y recomendado al demandante, thereby performing one “asesoramiento” which implies a strengthening in their reporting obligations (STJUE de 30 May 2013).

Regarding the error excusability, cited by STS 25 February 2016:

Without expertise in the stock market, the client can not know what specific information must sue the profesional. The customer must be confident that the service entity that advises investment is not omitting information on any relevant issue.”

Therefore, It is considered as excusable error.

Sobre las alegaciones de existencia de tacit confirmation and estoppel, la Sala considera que no existen al estar viciado el consentimiento: as the Supreme Court indicated in its judgment of 28 September 2009, "Not from its claim when they are vitiated by error". Incluso el mero conocimiento de la causa de nulidad, It does not imply acceptance (STS 24 July 2006).

En la sentencia de la primera instancia no se había establecido el pago de intereses legales sobre las remuneraciones recibidas por el cliente. El banco lo alegó en su recurso y la Audiencia acepta dicha solicitud.

Ultimately, the invalidity of the subscription "Valores Santander" is confirmed.

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