The article by Aneta Wiewiórowska-Domagalska explores the nuanced distinction between the assessment of the abusiveness of variable interest rate clauses tied to the WIBOR index versus those related to franc loans. The author argues that while both situations are linked by common mechanisms of control under EU directive 93/13, they are not interchangeable in terms of their legal outcomes. The piece emphasizes that the similarity between the two does not imply identical legal consequences, which is crucial for consumers facing issues with their loans.

Moreover, Wiewiórowska-Domagalska reflects on the impact of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rulings on franc loans, suggesting that these decisions have conferred an image of robust consumer protection rights that support consumers in every circumstance. This perception of omnipotent consumer protection has been fed by a unique combination of factual and legal developments, suggesting a significant shift in the judicial landscape in favor of consumers.

The author emphasizes that these legal violations by banks regarding foreign currency loans have been unequivocally recognized as breaches of EU law. The systematic nature of these violations highlights the disproportionate risks imposed on consumers, reinforcing the ongoing debate regarding the efficacy of consumer protection mechanisms in the lending industry. As such, the article not only critiques current practices but also calls for a reconsideration of how these financial indices are monitored and regulated, particularly in context to the evolving legal framework in Poland.