Badanie przez sąd z urzędu skuteczności powołania się na właściwość miejsca płatności weksla — uwagi na marginesie uchwały Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 19 października 2017, III CZP 42/17

Abstract

EX OFFICIO EXAMINATION THE EFFECTIVENESS OF INVOKING THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT ARISING FROM THE PLACE OF PAYMENT OF A PROMISSORY NOTE — COMMENTS ON THE MARGIN OF THE SUPREME COUTR’S RESOLUTION DATED 19 OCTOBER 2017, III CZP 42/17The article is about the relation between the obligation of ex officio examination of unfair terms in consumer contracts, including determining the jurisdiction of the court, and the nature of promissory law. The author will consider whether the domicile clause included in the promissory note issued by the consumer or defined in the promissory note agreement may constitute an unfair term in a consumer contract. It will be necessary to assess the character of promisory notes and terms contained. The consequence of the unilateral nature of issuing a promissory note is a denial of the right to examine the abusiveness of the terms contained in the fully completed promissory note. The possibility of examining the unfair character of the domicile clause exists, however, in the case of a blank promissory note, since it may not concern the promissory note itself, but the terms of the promissory note agreement.