Nonbanking credit and financial institutions depositors of nonbanking credit and financial institutions consumers themselves as well as future consumers of banks. . Law no. establishes a forced intervention mechanism by changing the object of the obligation and the legal regime of the contract. Concretely against the rule of law and legal security the law regulates the debtors right to repay the advance credit and renew the object of the obligation in the absence of prior checks regarding the existence of the legitimate justifying interest and in the absence of a fair and equitable compensation for the creditorsAof the finality of the consumer protection regulation is reached.
With reference to the violation of the principle of proportionality the Country Email List authors argue that there is no rational justification for establishing an identical legal treatment for different situations with the effect of imposing an excessive burden on the creditor. The legal treatment applicable to debtors who criticized law is identical as long as it does not establish criteria for differentiating debtors who are unable to pay from those who are not in this situation. The consequence of such an omission is that the bank is obliged to bear unjustifiably the infringements brought to its property right.
Generated by the release of debt including those of debtors who are not effectively unable to pay. In other words Law no. restricts the property right and contractual freedom of creditors without any of the justificationspremises contained in art. of the Constitution to exist. . On the other hand the authors of the exception of unconstitutionality appreciate that the criticized law affects not only the legal order but also the economic order because it comes into blatant conflict with the rights and interests of several socioprofessional categories a conflict likely to trigger deep systemic fissures in good functioning of the market economy. These socioprofessional categories are lending institution.
發表於 2023-12-28 12:13:18
