A resident of Kotovsk wanted to transfer the loan to his ex-wife

The appellate instance upheld the decision of the Kotovsky City Court, which refused the plaintiff to change the terms of the loan agreement. As established during the proceedings, the citizen tried to shift the loan obligations to his former spouse, referring to the fact that the loan was issued during his absence.

However, the court of first instance found that the loan was issued through the personal account of the plaintiff using his means of identification and authentication. Moreover, a significant part of the funds received went to repay the personal loan obligations of the plaintiff.

The key argument of the court was that the replacement of the borrower under the loan agreement is essentially a debt transfer. According to the current legislation, such transfer is allowed only with the consent of the creditor. In this case, the bank expressed disagreement with the change in the terms of the contract, in connection with which there were no legal grounds for satisfying the claim.

The court of appeal, having checked the legality and validity of the decision, agreed with the conclusions of colleagues. There were no violations of substantive or procedural law that could affect the outcome of the case. The decision has entered into force.