Case law · Cour de cassation
The 9 July 2025 rulings on Swiss franc loans.
On 9 July 2025, the First Civil Chamber opened unfair‑terms protection to borrowers paid in Swiss francs, and on the same day upheld the clause of a bank that had informed its client clearly. This is recent case law, liable to change.
Cass. 1st civ., 9 July 2025, nos. 24-19.647 and 24-18.018 · Hello Justice analysis
What the rulings decide.
Before these rulings, several courts of appeal refused unfair‑terms protection to borrowers paid in Swiss francs. As their income was in the loan currency, they inferred there was no exchange‑rate risk. The Cour de cassation expressly reversed that position.
The financed property is in France and is valued in euros. Exchange‑rate risk is therefore assessed over the whole term of the contract. That assessment takes into account possible changes in the borrower’s situation: a change of job, a return to France, retirement.
The Court did not limit the effects of its ruling in time. It applies to pending cases as well as to cases yet to be brought.
The two rulings do not reach the same result. In case no. 24-18.018, the Court dismissed the borrower’s appeal, because the bank had given clear information on the effects of a change in the exchange rate. The outcome therefore depends on the documents in each case, starting with those handed over at signing.
The earlier decisions.
These rulings add to case law built in stages. On 10 June 2021, the Court of Justice of the European Union set the transparency requirement for the exchange‑rate clause. On 30 March 2022, the Cour de cassation held that a claim against an unfair clause is not time‑barred. It also held that an exchange‑rate clause without numerical simulations is not drafted clearly. On 12 July 2023, it set out the restitution that follows once the clause is set aside.
The detailed analysis, ruling by ruling, is published on the blog: the 2022-2025 CHF case‑law consolidation.
What this means for a case.
A case is judged on its documents: the loan offer and its annexes, amendments, the repayment schedule, statements, and the redemption statement for a repaid loan. The lawyer reads them and sets out what can be claimed. Hello Justice funds the proceedings and plays no part in running them.
The principles set by the courts.
What the decisions hold, with their references. The outcome of each case remains for the court to decide, on its own documents, and this case law is recent and liable to change.
The bank had to inform the borrower.
It had to explain how the loan worked and what it could cost over its whole term. What the bank can prove decides the case. Cass. 1re civ., rulings no. 24-19.647 and no. 24-18.018.Signed information upholds the clause.
A 2014 loan, an offer and two signed notices, including the document of the ACPR recommendation of 6 April 2012: the borrower’s appeal is dismissed. Ruling no. 24-18.018.Without that information, the clause can be set aside.
Exchange‑rate risk is assessed over the whole term of the loan, taking into account the borrower’s status as a cross‑border worker and the location of the property in France. The 2023 position is abandoned, with no time limit. Ruling no. 24-19.647.Each case turns on its documents.
The lawyer reviews the documents the borrower actually received at signing: the offer, its annexes and the notices.The loan is recalculated in euros.
A clause found to be unfair is deemed never to have existed: the loan is recalculated in euros from the outset. Cass. 1re civ., 12 July 2023, no. 22-17.030.A claim to have the clause declared unfair is not time‑barred.
A claim seeking a declaration that a clause is unfair is not subject to any limitation period. Cass. 1re civ., 30 March 2022, no. 19-17.996.
The rulings in chronological order.
The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled in 2021, then the Cour de cassation, up to the two 2025 rulings. Each decision is summarised with its scope.
Court of Justice of the European UnionC-609/19 and C-776/19 to C-782/19
The exchange‑rate clause must be plain and intelligible.
An exchange‑rate clause escapes review for unfairness only if it is plain and intelligible. The borrower must be able to assess what a sharp rise in the Swiss franc would cost them.
Cour de cassation, First Civil Chamberno. 19-17.996
A claim against an unfair clause is not time‑barred.
A claim to have a clause declared unfair is not subject to any limitation period. Without numerical simulations of unfavourable scenarios, the exchange‑rate clause is not drafted in plain and intelligible language.
Cour de cassation, First Civil Chamberno. 22-17.030
The loan is recalculated as if it had been taken out in euros.
Once the clause is set aside, the loan is recalculated in euros from the outset. The five‑year period to claim restitution runs from the decision that finds the clause unfair.
Cour de cassation, First Civil Chamberno. 24-19.647
Exchange‑rate risk is assessed over the whole term of the loan.
A borrower paid in Swiss francs remains exposed to exchange‑rate risk when the financed property is located in France. That risk is assessed over the whole term of the loan, and unfair‑terms protection is open to them. This is recent case law, liable to change.
Cour de cassation, First Civil Chamberno. 24-18.018
Clear information on exchange‑rate risk keeps the clause in place.
On the same day, the Court dismissed the appeal of a borrower to whom the bank had given clear information on the effects of a change in the exchange rate. The outcome therefore depends on the documents handed over at signing, which the lawyer examines in each case.
Sources: Court of Justice of the European Union, Cour de cassation (published decisions). The rulings of 9 July 2025 are recent case law, liable to change. Each case is assessed on its own facts.
Information talks
Swiss franc mortgages: talks in Ferney‑Voltaire.
Talks at 12:15, 13:15, 17:15, 18:15 and 19:15, with lawyers from ACTIVE AVOCATS, a firm of the COGEP group, on recent case law, and Hello Justice, on how proceedings are funded. Fifteen‑minute one‑to‑one meetings with one of the firm’s lawyers, from 11:00. Entry is free, on registration.
- 28 OctoberFerney‑Voltaire
- 3 NovemberFerney‑Voltaire
Frequently asked questions.
The First Civil Chamber of the Cour de cassation handed down two published rulings with different outcomes. No. 24-19.647 holds that a borrower paid in Swiss francs remains exposed to exchange‑rate risk when the financed property is located in France: that risk is assessed over the whole term of the contract, and unfair‑terms protection is open to such a borrower. No. 24-18.018 dismisses the appeal of a borrower to whom the bank had given clear information on the effects of a change in the exchange rate: the outcome depends on the documents in each case. This is recent case law, liable to change.
Borrowers who took out a Swiss franc mortgage, in particular cross‑border workers paid in Swiss francs whose financed property is in France. A loan that has been repaid, restructured by amendment or assigned to another institution can also be reviewed.
A claim to have a clause declared unfair is not subject to any limitation period. The claim for restitution is time‑barred five years after the decision that finds the clause unfair. The Court did not limit the effects of the 2025 rulings in time: they apply to pending cases. On the basis of the documents, the lawyer determines what can be claimed in each case.
The loan offer and its annexes, any amendments, the repayment schedule, direct‑debit notices or statements, and the redemption statement if the loan has been repaid. The review covers the indexation clause, the information given on exchange‑rate risk at signing, and the dates.
In the Swiss franc mortgage programme: Having your case checked is free, as are the eligibility test and the submission. If your case is accepted, you pay €300 incl. VAT when it is opened, for the procedural costs (stamp duty, judicial officer, local counsel). Your lawyer’s fee at first instance, €3,000 incl. VAT, is borne by Hello Justice according to the amount borrowed: in full up to €100,000, three quarters up to €200,000, half above that. The rest, €750 or €1,500 incl. VAT, is yours to pay. Only if the case succeeds, a success fee of 14% incl. VAT is due on the sums recovered and on the saving obtained on the outstanding capital. The sums awarded under article 700 and the costs go to the lawyer. If the case fails, you repay nothing to Hello Justice. If there is an appeal, your lawyer’s fee, €2,000 incl. VAT, is borne on the same tier, and local counsel before the court of appeal in full. You pay the €225 appeal duty and, if your loan exceeds €100,000, the rest of the fee, €500 or €1,000 incl. VAT.
Analysis on our blog.
Case Law
The 2022-2025 rulings on Swiss franc loans.
The Cour de cassation built its case law on Swiss franc loans between March 2022 and July 2025. It is recent and liable to change.
Case Law
One year after the 9 July 2025 rulings on Swiss franc loans.
On 9 July 2025, the Cour de cassation published two rulings on Swiss franc loans. This case law is recent and liable to change.
Case Law
The CJEU’s C-609/19 judgment and Swiss franc loans.
On 10 June 2021, the CJEU set out what a bank must explain to a foreign currency borrower. The Cour de cassation has applied this standard since 2022.