The Structure of European Company Law: From Crisis to Boom

This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.The two constitutional principles of subsidiarity and integration in the European Union clearly force the system to be one of jurisdictional competition. The text books still do not start from the assumption that diversity, and the tools for making it compatible with integration, are just as important an element of European company law as harmonisation. This paper argues that they should. This would then lead them to discuss in which areas there should be such competition, to identify the conditions for functioning competition and to try to suggest where and how to enhance it. Diversity clearly requires information. Therefore, the second core element of the structure of European company law consists of disclosure rules. These rules are indeed clearly dominant in European company law, be it in accounting law, the law of capital markets or in traditional EU Company Law Directives. On this basis, other important features — pairs of concepts — can also be explained: (1) the fact that European company law focuses on limited liability companies and sometimes exclusively on PLCs; (2) the fact that European company law is so extroverted, that is to say, the regulation of the third-party relationship is so dominant, that shareholders’ rights are really regulated only insofar as the proportionate share is ‘constitutionally’ guaranteed; and (3) the fact that capital markets must clearly be seen as an integral part of European company law and may not be disregarded in any description.Peer Reviewe

The Future of Contract Law

This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.This contribution starts out with the fundamental changes society and law have undergone since 200 years ago with the ‘discovery of consensus' and asks the question whether at the turn of our millennium, we are living similarly in a period of fundamental change. In this context, the contribution asks the question about the future of contract law. It does so primarily for Europe. To answer this question, it is argued that both institutionally and in substance contract law is indeed undergoing fundamental change, starting only a few decades ago. Contract law has become in its dynamic aspects largely European, decreasingly national, and will become over the next few decades, in substance, method and style, even primarily European. It has become a law in which party autonomy and instruments of order and protection have become similarly important and this process will continue. Standard contract terms, consumer protection, anti-discrimination are only three key elements; the financial crisis will trigger further thinking. The aim is to discover an equilibrium in which the material freedom of all parties concerned is best furthered. The article then argues that a trend towards codification comes together with a trend not to consider the code as ‘universal order' any longer, that a trend towards generalisation comes together with a trend to differentiate more even in a general part of contract law: between different types of contract partners, different types of groups of contracts (spot contracts and long-term contracts), and different paradigms for the formation of contracts. The article concludes with an examination of some core areas where major steps of modernisation have been taken lately and it forecasts that contract law will be more international, interdisciplinary, more interested in the rule-setting process, more market and business oriented. In short it predicts that a similar discussion to that found within debates about corporate governance will develop for contract governance on a European level.Cette contribution évoque tout d'abord les changements fondamentaux que la société et le droit ont connus depuis 200 ans avec la “découverte du consentement” et elle soulève la question de savoir si, au tournant de notre millénaire, nous sommes également en train de vivre une période de changement fondamental. Dans ce contexte, cette contribution soulève la question de l'avenir du droit des contrats. Elle le fait principalement par rapport à l'Europe. Pour répondre à cette question, il est soutenu qu'à la fois institutionnellement et substantiellement, le droit des contrats est effectivement en train de connaître un changement fondamental, qui a commencé seulement il y a quelques dizaines d'années. Le droit des contrats est devenu dans ses aspects dynamiques largement européen, de moins en moins national, et il deviendra même, dans les prochaines décennies, essentiellement européen en substance, méthode et style. Il est devenu un droit dans lequel l'autonomie de la volonté et les instruments d'ordre et de protection sont devenus d'égale importance et ce processus se poursuivra. Les clauses contractuelles standard, la protection des consommateurs, la non-discrimination sont trois éléments clefs ; la crise financière déclenchera de nouvelles réflexions. Le but est de découvrir un équilibre dans lequel la liberté matérielle de toutes les parties concernées soit mieux sauvegardée. L'article soutient alors qu'une tendance à la codification va de pair avec une tendance à ne plus considérer un code comme un ordre universel, qu'une tendance à la généralisation va de pair avec une tendance à davantage distinguer, y compris dans la partie générale du droit des contrats : entre les différents types de partenaires contractuels, les différents types de groupes de contrats (contrats ponctuels et contrats de longue durée), et les différents paradigmes pour la formation des contrats. Cet article conclut avec l'examen de certains domaines cruciaux où des progrès majeurs dans la modernisation ont été récemment effectués et il prédit que le droit des contrats sera davantage international et interdisciplinaire, davantage intéressé par le processus d'établissement des règles, et davantage orienté vers le marché et les entreprises. En bref, il prédit qu'une discussion similaire à celle que l'on trouve dans les débats sur la gouvernance d'entreprise se développera pour la gouvernance des contrats à une échelle européenne.Ausgangspunkt für diesen Beitrag sind die grundstürzenden Umwälzungen, die Gesellschaft und Recht vor 200 Jahren mit der “Entdeckung des Konsenses” als gesellschaftsordnendes Grundprinzip erfuhren. Die Grundfrage ist dann, ob wir zum Jahrtausendwechsel an einer ähnlich signifikanten Schwelle stehen, vor allem in Europa. Die Antwort ist zweigeteilt, sowohl institutionell als auch inhaltlich erscheint der sich derzeit vollziehende Wechsel in der Tat ebenfalls grundstürzend. Vertragsrecht ist in seiner Grunddynamik inzwischen bereits großteils Europäisch beeinflusst, immer weniger national, es wird jedoch in den nächsten Jahrzehnten in Substanz, Methode und Stil wirklich Europäisch dominiert sein. Außerdem werden im Vertragsrecht zunehmend die Elemente der Freiheit und diejenigen der Ordnung breit in ein Gleichgewicht gebracht und dieser Prozess wird sich fortsetzen. Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen, Verbrauchervertragsrecht und Antidiskriminierungsrecht bilden nur drei Kernbausteine, die Finanzkrise stößt auch im Vertragsrecht weitere überlegungen an. Ziel ist es, ein Gleichgewicht zu finden, in dem die materielle Freiheit aller Vertragsbeteiligter (ggf. auch betroffener Dritter) möglichst gut gefördert wird. Der Beitrag wendet sich dann dem verstärkten Trend zu (Re-)Kodifikation zu und sieht diesen in einem Spannungsfeld insofern, als zugleich Kodifikationen weniger als “universelle Ordnung” gesehen werden als früher, und dass ein Trend hin zur Verallgemeinerung ebenfalls parallel läuft mit einer zunehmenden Differenzierung nach Gruppen selbst im Allgemeinen Teil: verschiedenen Gruppen von Beteiligten, verschiedenen Gruppen von Verträgen (etwa Einmal- und Langfristverträgen), verschiedenen Arten der Vertragsbegründung. Abschließend werden einige Kernbereiche der Modernisierung in den Blick genommen. Die Vorhersage geht dahin, dass die Vertragsrechte (und vor allem die Vertragsrechtswissenschaften) internationaler, stärker interdisziplinär und stärker regelsetzungsorientiert werden, stärker eingebunden in eine allgemeine Diskussion von Märkten und spezifisch wirtschaftsrechtlich geprägt. Kurz, eine ähnliche Entwicklung wird vorhergesagt wie diejenige im Bereiche des Gesellschaftsrechts mit der Corporate Governance Diskussion.Peer Reviewe

A View on Digital Environments and Post-Transaction Assent

This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.This paper gives a birds’ eye view on the ALI Restatement on Consumer Contracts (proposal) and European, and partly also Member State, law of standard contract terms with respect to the environment where these standard contracts and assent to them appears to be particularly fleeting, namely in digital contexts. It does so, however, with a broader scope: It tries to explain why assent rules are not meaningless even in a world where most consumers and customers do not read standard contract terms, and it tries to explain how lessons could be deduced also for a meaningful and more differentiated fairness control. It argues that favouring intervention of control (ie information) intermediaries – such as consumer associations – is key and that the preservation of possibilities for negotiation should be maintained and valued. In these respects, the paper is inspired in good part by company law and capital market law dealing with parallel problems.Cet article présente une vue panoramique du projet de Restatement de l’ALI sur les contrats à la consommation ainsi que sur le droit de l’Union et celui des Etats membres sur les clauses standardisées dans des contextes où le contenu de ces clauses et le consentement qui leur est donné paraissent particulièrement insaisissables, à savoir dans le monde numérique. Mais il a aussi un object plus large. Il vise à expliquer pourquoi le régime du consentement conserve un sens même dans un monde où consommateurs et clients ne lisent pas, pour la plupart, les clauses contractuelles, et tente d’expliquer comment en tirer des enseignements en vue d’un contrôle significatif et plus différencié de l’équité contractuelle. L’argument avancé est qu’en favorisant l’intervention d’un contrôle (c’est-à-dire, de l’information), les intermédiaires – telles les associations de consommateurs – sont des acteurs clé, et que des possibilités même résiduelles de négociation devraient être sauvegardées. A tous ces égards, cet article s’inspire en grande partie de la pratique des marchés des capitaux confrontés à des problèmes similaires.Peer Reviewe

The Structure of the DCFR – Which Approach for Today's Contract Law?

This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.This paper discusses the DCFR as a potential model for a European Code because core members of the study group see it as this. The paper discusses, first, the overall structure and does so in two respects: It asks the question whether one should really aim at a big Code – including all obligations and large parts of property law – and argues that one should rather concentrate on a modern and convincing Contract Law Code, given that contract law is very complex today and there are not really many common problems with other obligations anyhow; the content and structure of contract law has reduced quality in the DCFR as a result of its combination with other obligations. Moreover, this paper asks the question whether all types of contract partners should be included and argues that the DCFR is right in doing so, but that it does not really reflect modern theory on where markets fail and therefore does not convincingly find the reasons where and why to differentiate in the substantive law solutions. In the two other sections two core phenomena of modern contract law are discussed: information and formation of contracts and service contracts and networks in today's service society. These are discussed with a view to see how intensively their peculiarities have indeed influenced the structure of the DCFR. Little such influence can be detected. These examples also show how well founded is the criticism that much too often general clauses are chosen instead of finding concrete solutions.Peer Reviewe

Germany and the Schuldrechtsmodernisierung 2002

This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.The Schuldrechtsmodernisierung of 26 November 2001 is probably the largest reform of German codified contract law undertaken for a century. The three substantive law parts of this reform are discussed in this contribution: the new regime on breach of contract, the new regime on limitation, and the new law on sales and works contracts. Reference is made also to a fourth major element, the integration of consumer law into the civil code. It is argued that German law now follows a uniform concept of breach and distinguishes quite convincingly with respect to three major remedies. It is argued, that the reform was quite successful.Peer Reviewe

EC Financial Services and Contract Law – Developments 2005–2007

This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.The contribution is a follow-up of the overview published in ERCL 2005, 482. While the law with respect to prudential supervision changed little, contract law developed considerably. This is so despite the fact that no important new legislation has been adopted: In the area of commercial banking, the new Consumer Credit Directive is still under discussion. There is, however, an ambitious project to regulate all payment instruments in one sole legal measure, namely: credit transfers, credit and debit cards and direct debit. In the area of investment banking, the Market in Financial Instruments Directive of 2004 (MiFID) had to be transposed in the Member States until 1st November 2007. This is important because the so-called Lamfalussy regulatory architecture which was used for this directive is about integrating more coherently EC legislation, national transposition and effective implementation. Therefore, while giving a general overview as well, the article concentrates on these two developments: the proposal for a payments directive and the transposition of the MiFID.Peer Reviewe

EC Financial Services and Contract Law – Developments 2007–2010

This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.The contribution is a follow-up on the overview published in ERCL 2008, 45 and covers the latest developments from 2007 through the first half of 2010. The law with respect to prudential supervision has changed little; there are, however, changes underway as a reaction to the financial crisis (see section I). More importantly, however, contract law developed considerably. Important new legislation has been adopted in the area of commercial banking, while the Market in Financial Instruments Directive of 2004 (MiFID) and its transposition were at the centre of the last report. New legislation has now been adopted in the other two important sectors of banking business and thus the series of second generation of banking law directives is complete. In the area of bank loans, harmonisation has changed considerably with the new EU Consumer Credit Directive of 2008. In the area of the payment business, changes have been even more drastic, as virtually all payment instruments have now been harmonised with the new EU Payments Systems Directive of late 2007, and this not only for the consumer area. This directive now covers: credit transfers, credit and debit cards, and direct debits. The importance of the new material makes it necessary to concentrate on these two measures mainly (sections II and III) and to add only two short sections on important developments under the MiFID (section IV) and on some general considerations concerning the overall picture now reached in European Banking Contract Law (section V).Peer Reviewe

German Contract Law Five Years After the Fundamental Contract Law Reform in the Schuldrechtsmodernisierung

This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively.After five years, core questions regarding the large contract law reform in Germany of 2002, the Schuldrechtsmodernisierung, have been answered in the case law, mostly by the German Supreme Court. The article discusses clarifications with respect to: the extent to which consumer law protection applies; the concept of non-conformity with the contract and the remedies based on such non-conformity under the EC Sales Directive (and its German transposition); the different kinds of damages which can be distinguished and questions of their computation; and finally the role which the new legal model plays when standard contract terms in pure business transactions are controlled. The German case law is astonishingly dense in all these respects already.Peer Reviewe

Digital Technology as a Challenge to European Contract Law

Offering an overview of the interactions between digital technologies and contract law, we identify three pillars in this architecture: the regulatory framework; digital interventions over the life cycle of the contract; and digital objects of contracting. The regulatory framework, which itself may draw on digital technology to effectively pursue its ends, shapes, and is shaped by, the other two pillars. More specifically, on the one hand, we show how four key technologies – digital platforms, Big Data analytics, artificial intelligence, and blockchain – are being used at different stages of the contractual process (from the screening for contractual partners to formation, enforcement and interpretation) and engender novel market dynamics that, in many instances, necessitate regulatory responses. On the other hand, digitally facilitated contracting increasingly relates to digital content as the object of the contract; however, while this area has notably been the subject of the proposed Directive on Contracts for the Supply of Digital Content and thus has received some first ‘European structure’, we argue that a number of important blind spots remain that fail to be addressed by the directive. All in all, the use of digital technology in contracting will likely reinforce an adaptive, relational view and practice of contracting. This increased fluidity engenders a vast potential for preference-conforming, time-sensitive contracts; however, to the extent that it also mirrors novel asymmetries of information and power, the ordering mechanisms of the law may simultaneously be more needed than ever.Peer Reviewe

Foreign Currency Loans and the Foundations of European Contract Law – A Case for Financial and Contractual Crisis?

Loans with variable interest rates indexed to foreign currencies carry a double risk for borrowers: a rise of interest rates and an adverse development in the exchange rate. While they therefore could have been forbidden for consumer credit, they are allowed both at EU and (most) national levels. Consumer credit arrangements indexed to foreign currencies that were legal in principle have raised enormous problems when they occurred in large numbers in Eastern and Central European countries and reference was not directly written into the terms (like in Romania), but could change with additional discretionary decisions (such as in Poland and Croatia). While Croatia has introduced special legislation to cure the overall problem, Polish cases are potentially not only causing a systemic risk for the2 whole banking system, but abundantly are the subject of CJEU case law. This triggers the core interest in contract law, namely an unheard-of relevance in EU law of general and more specific questions of the law of restitution – on the basis of unjust enrichment and/or of damages. This article presents the following five main theses. Firstly, while the Unfair Contract Terms Directive (UCTD) contains too vague a scheme of remedies/sanctions for detailed answers, the overarching benchmark is clear, namely a fair balance of interests and the meeting of justified expectations, which the parties, especially on the consumer side, could have had at the moment when the loan was issued. Secondly, general (EU) principles of unjust enrichment, as well as of damages, are recognised by the CJEU in EU law. They order the restitution of what was gained above the status quo ante, but could not have been acquired on markets even by informed and proper contracting at that time and/or the restitution of losses incurred as compared to the status quo ante. Thirdly, Articles 23 and 24 of the Mortgage Credit Directive (MCD) constitute a suitable model around which a set of claims in unjust enrichment can be shaped and can be applied also to old cases. Fourthly, any windfall profit of borrowers (gain beyond what could have been achieved at the moment of formation of the contract) has to be avoided in the name of fairness and justified expectations – which are recognised in CJEU case law as the two main benchmarks of the regime of sanctions of the UCTD. Finally, a fair restitution regime is reached if the borrower, who had not been properly informed (with the nullified clause), can now make an informed choice between the different offers that were offered on markets when the loan was issued. Thus, he/she could now opt for a loan in either the national currency plus applicable interbank interest rate (in the Polish case Zloty tied to WIBOR) or their foreign currency counterparts (i.e. a loan in CHF tied to LIBOR). Expropriation (of banks) of the loan capital, as well as the possibility to use that capital to generate interest have to be avoided, for penalisation is neither an aim of European contract law nor of the UCTD.Les prêts à taux variable indexés sur des devises étrangères comportent un double risque pour les emprunteurs : une hausse des taux d’intérêt et une évolution défavorable du taux de change. Alors qu’ils auraient pu être interdits pour le crédit à la consommation, ils sont autorisés tant au niveau de l’UE qu’au niveau national (la plupart du temps). Les contrats de crédit à la consommation indexés sur des devises étrangères qui étaient par principe légaux ont soulevé d’énormes problèmes lorsqu’ils se sont multipliés dans les pays d’Europe centrale et orientale et que la référence n’était pas directement inscrite dans les conditions (comme en Roumanie),3 mais pouvait changer avec des décisions discrétionnaires supplémentaires (comme en Pologne et en Croatie). Alors que la Croatie a introduit une législation spéciale pour remédier au problème général, les cas polonais sont potentiellement non seulement à l’origine d’un risque systémique pour l’ensemble du système bancaire, mais font abondamment l’objet de la jurisprudence de la CJUE. Cela implique la pertinence en droit européen du droit des contrats à travers les questions générales et plus spécifiques du droit de la restitution – sur la base de l’enrichissement sans cause et/ou des dommages et intérêts. Cet article présente les cinq thèses principales suivantes. Premièrement, bien que la directive sur les clauses contractuelles abusives (UCDT) contienne un schéma trop vague de remèdes/sanctions pour permettre des réponses détaillées, le critère principal est clair, à savoir un juste équilibre des intérêts et la satisfaction des attentes justifiées que les parties, en particulier du côté des consommateurs, auraient pu avoir au moment où le prêt a été accordé. Deuxièmement, les principes généraux (européens) de l’enrichissement sans cause, ainsi que des dommages et intérêts, sont reconnus par la CJUE dans le droit européen. Ils ordonnent la restitution de ce qui a été acquis au-dessus du statu quo ante, mais qui n’aurait pas pu être acquis sur les marchés même en contractant en connaissance de cause à ce moment-là et/ou la restitution des pertes subies par rapport au statu quo ante. Troisièmement, les articles 23 et 24 de la directive sur le crédit hypothécaire (MCD) constituent un modèle approprié autour duquel un ensemble d’actions en enrichissement sans cause peut être façonné et peut être appliqué également à des affaires anciennes. Quatrièmement, tout profit exceptionnel des emprunteurs (gain dépassant ce qui aurait pu être obtenu au moment de la formation du contrat) doit être évité au nom de l’équité et des attentes justifiées – qui sont reconnues dans la jurisprudence de la CJUE comme les deux principaux critères du régime de sanctions de la UCTD. Enfin, un régime de restitution équitable est atteint si l’emprunteur, qui n’avait pas été correctement informé (avec la clause annulée), peut maintenant faire un choix éclairé entre les différentes offres qui étaient proposées sur les marchés au moment de l’émission du prêt. Ainsi, il peut maintenant opter pour un prêt soit dans la monnaie nationale plus le taux d’intérêt interbancaire applicable (dans le cas de la Pologne, le zloty est lié au WIBOR), soit dans la monnaie étrangère correspondante (c’est-à-dire un prêt en CHF lié au LIBOR). L’expropriation (des banques) du capital emprunté, ainsi que la possibilité d’utiliser ce capital pour générer des intérêts doivent être évitées, car la pénalisation n’est pas un objectif du droit européen des contrats ni de la UCDT.Fremdwährungskreditverträge mit Vario-Zins bergen zwei Hauptrisiken für Darlehensnehmer: negative Zinsentwicklung (idR Anstieg) und ungünstige Entwicklung des Wechselkurses der Referenzwährung. Es wäre daher denkbar, sie gegenüber Verbrauchern zu verbieten, was freilich weder auf EU- noch auf nationaler Ebene geschah (jedenfalls in Polen). Die Arrangements, die demnach4 grundsätzlich legitim und wirksam waren, warfen erhebliche Probleme auf, wenn sie massenhaft gewählt wurden (in Zentral-und Osteuropa) und nicht schlicht auf die Referenzwährung (mit Referenzzinssatz) verwiesen wurde (so idR in Rumänien), sondern Umrechnungsmechanismen in AGBs ausgestaltet wurden (wie in Polen und Kroatien). Während Kroatien das Problem durch Spezialgesetz weitgehend löste, könnten die polnischen Fälle nicht nur das Potential haben, eine Bankenkrise auszulösen, sondern sind auch im großen Umfang Gegenstand des Fallrechts des EuGHs. Dies ist auch der Grund dafür, dass sie auch im Kernbereich des Europäischen Vertragsrechts absolut zentral sind, namentlich, dass sie mehr als je zuvor eine breite Diskussion und Beschäftigung mit dem Rückabwicklungsregime auslösen – namentlich mit den Instrumenten der ungerechtfertigten Bereicherung, aber auch des Schadensersatzrechts. Dieser Beitrag formuliert hierzu fünf Thesen. Erstens, während die AGB-Richtlinie nur ein zu allgemeines Sanktions-Regime formuliert, um darauf konkrete und detaillierte Antworten in Einzelfragen zu stützen, ist doch die Generalzielsetzung klar, namentlich, dass ein fairer Interessenausgleich zu suchen ist und die gerechtfertigten Markterwartungen, wie sie bei Vertragsschluss denkbar erschienen, abgebildet werden sollen, für beide Seiten (auch den Verbraucher). Zweitens, allgemeine Grundsätze des Unionsrechts zur ungerechtfertigten Bereicherung, aber auch zum Schadensersatzrecht werden im Fallrecht des EuGHs als solche anerkannt. Sie gehen dahin, dass Gewinne über den status quo ante, die damals auch bei angemessener Information und ordnungsgemäßem Vertragsschluss gar nicht hätten erzielt werden können, als Bereicherung auszukehren sind, aber auch, dass Schadensersatzansprüche einen Schaden gegenüber dem Zustand voraussetzen, der damals überhaupt erzielbar war. Drittens bildet Artikel 23 der Wohnimmobilien-Richtlinie ein sinnvolles – ungleich besser ausdifferenziertes – Modell der Rückabwicklung, das grundsätzlich auch für Altfälle (vor 2014) zugrunde zu legen ist. Viertens sind Gewinne des Kreditnehmers über den Zustand hinaus zu vermeiden, den er bestmöglich bei Vertragsschluss hätte realisieren können, dies aufgrund der Grundsätze von Treu und Glauben (ʻfairnessʼ) und gerechtfertigter Markt-und Parteienerwartungen – der beiden Hauptzielrichtungen einer Auslegung der AGB-Richtlinie (auch) in der EuGH-Rechtsprechung. Fünftens ist ein faires Restitutionsregime jedenfalls dann realisiert, wenn der Kreditnehmer heute (mit voller Information) die Wahl zwischen Alternativen nachholen kann, die damals auf dem Markt zur Verfügung standen – mehr gebietet der Verbraucherschutz nicht. Dies bedeutet etwa eine Wahlmöglichkeit zwischen Vertragswährung in nationaler Währung mit nationalem Interbank-Zinsindex (zB in Polen Zloty verbunden mit dem Zinsindex WIBOR) oder Vertragswährung in ausländischer Währung mit entsprechendem Zinsindex (zB CHF verbunden mit dem Zinsindex LIBOR). Im Ergebnis ist eine Enteignung der Kreditgeber nicht zu rechtfertigen und zu vermeiden und zwar hinsichtlich der Darlehensvaluta selbst (Rückzahlung), aber auch der Dispositionsfreiheit, sie nur gegen angemessene Verzinsung zur Verfügung5 zu stellen. Pönalisierung der Kreditgeber bildet kein Ziel des Europäischen Vertragsrechts und auch nicht der AGB-Richtlinie.Peer Reviewe