Case law · Cour de cassation
The 9 July 2025 rulings on Swiss franc loans.
Two published rulings of the First Civil Chamber open unfair‑terms protection to borrowers paid in Swiss francs. 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 solution in time. It applies to pending cases as well as to cases yet to be brought.
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 figures 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 says what the case supports. Hello Justice funds the proceedings and plays no part in running them.
The decisions, in order.
From the Court of Justice of the European Union to the two 2025 rulings: what each decision holds, and its reach.
Court of Justice of the European UnionC-776/19
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 figures showing 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 Chambernos. 24-19.647 and 24-18.018
A borrower paid in Swiss francs can challenge the clause.
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.
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.
Frequently asked questions.
The First Civil Chamber of the Cour de cassation handed down two published rulings (nos. 24-19.647 and 24-18.018). It held 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. 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. The lawyer establishes, documents in hand, what each case supports.
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 file checked costs you nothing. Hello Justice pays the flat fees of COGEP AVOCATS (€5,000). Procedural costs and disbursements remain payable by you, capped at €300 including VAT. If the case succeeds, the lawyer and the funder share a success fee of 14% including VAT, taken only from the sums actually recovered. If it fails, you repay nothing to Hello Justice.
Analyses 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.