The Supreme Court prohibited banks from introducing new commissions unilaterally

A precedent was the case of a Murmansk resident, who went to court after his bank canceled a commission for withdrawing cash from a credit card, although previously this operation was free. The bank changed the terms unilaterally, adding a commission, although the agreement did not provide for such changes. The Supreme Court ruled that these types of actions by credit institutions are unacceptable.

First, the man filed a lawsuit at a lower court, where the court sided with the bank, considering that changing the conditions and introducing a commission was acceptable, since cash withdrawal is an independent service that requires payment. The court decided that the credit card allows cashless payments and that the issuance of cash is an “additional property benefit.”

The Supreme Court did not agree with this conclusion and stressed that neither the law on banks and banking activities nor the law on consumer credit gives banks the right to unilaterally change the terms of the contract and introduce new tariffs. The court ruled that such changes unreasonably increase the borrower’s debt to the bank.

In March 2024, the Supreme Court also overturned the decision in favor of T-Bank (then called Tinkoff), which had previously written off the client about 70,000 euros for a profitable currency conversion in 2022. The case was reviewed and in May the The court determined that the man had not violated the law, meaning that blocking the account and canceling funds was illegal.