.jpg)
What Did the BGH Decide?
The BGH clarified (Case Nos. XI ZR 61/23, XI ZR 65/23, XI ZR 161/23, XI ZR 183/23) that custody fees charged on savings and overnight deposit accounts violate fundamental principles of contract law. According to the court, such accounts are designed to accrue interest in favor of the customer, not to impose fees for merely holding funds. While the ruling addressed specific consumer claims, the court’s reasoning suggests that its conclusions could also be applicable to corporate clients.
A New Outlook for Businesses
In recent years, many companies have tolerated negative interest rates on large deposits. Banks typically justified this with the European Central Bank’s low-interest-rate policy. Now, the legal legitimacy of this practice in the commercial sector comes into question—particularly regarding standardized contractual clauses used to introduce custody fees, which may prove to be invalid.
Reimbursement: Opportunities and Challenges
Whether businesses are entitled to a refund depends on the specific terms of their agreements. Key aspects to review include:
- Transparency Requirements: Were negative interest rates clearly communicated or hidden within the general terms and conditions (GTC)?
- Principle of Good Faith: Could it be reasonably expected that custody fees were legally permissible?
- Individual Contractual Agreements: Companies that negotiated specific terms may face different legal outcomes.
Initial legal assessments indicate that the chances of success are promising—especially where custody fees were imposed through unilateral changes to the GTC.
Recommended Actions for Companies
- Review Past Payments
Companies should examine account statements and bank records from recent years to determine whether, and to what extent, negative interest payments were made. - Seek Legal Counsel
A thorough legal analysis is essential to realistically evaluate the chances of recovering payments. Lawyers specializing in banking and capital markets law can assess whether the contractual clauses used are legally contestable. - Assert Claims in Due Time
If irregularities are discovered, companies should proactively contact their banks to request a refund. It is crucial to observe applicable statutory limitation periods.
Conclusion: Acting Now Pays Off
The BGH ruling could have significant consequences—not just for private individuals but also for businesses. Those who take the initiative to review their contracts and past payments now stand a strong chance of recovering unjustified fees. Early action is essential to avoid forfeiting potential claims.
Companies that may be affected should act promptly to safeguard their rights and offset potential financial losses stemming from the negative interest rate era.
