Commentary on Judgment No. 15695 of 2024: Conventional Purpose Loan

The recent judgment of the Court of Cassation No. 15695 of June 5, 2024, offers an important opportunity for reflection on the subject of conventional purpose loans. This type of contract, which deviates from the general rules provided by the Civil Code, requires particular attention during drafting and execution. In particular, the judgment clarifies that a purpose loan is valid only if the borrower assumes a specific obligation towards the lender, linked to the latter's interest in the use of the funds.

The Conventional Purpose Loan: Definition and Requirements

According to Article 1813 of the Civil Code, a loan is a contract whereby one party delivers a sum of money to another, with the obligation to return it. However, in the case of a conventional purpose loan, the situation becomes more complex. Judgment No. 15695 establishes that it is necessary for the contract to contain a specific clause obligating the borrower to use the funds for a determined purpose, identified by the lender's interest.

• Specific obligation of the borrower
• Lender's interest in the allocation of funds
• Insufficiency of mere indication of motives

This aspect is crucial: the mere indication of the reason for which the financing is granted is not sufficient to guarantee the validity of the contract. Only when there is a specific obligation does the clause regarding the destination of the loaned sum affect the contract's cause, making contractual nullity possible in case of failure to achieve the agreed plan.

Conventional Purpose Loan - Content - Lender's Interest Solely in the Realization of the Program for the Destination of the Sum - Insufficiency - Lender's Interest in the Realization of the Program - Necessity. A conventional purpose loan, which represents a deviation from the contractual type of art. 1813 of the Civil Code, can only be defined as such when it contains a clause whereby the borrower has assumed a specific obligation towards the lender, due to the latter's interest – direct or indirect – in a specific method of using the sums for a determined purpose, with the mere indication of the motives for which the financing is granted being insufficient for this purpose; consequently, only in the former case does the clause regarding the destination of the loaned sum affect the contract's cause, and its non-realization may lead to contractual nullity.

Practical Implications for the Parties Involved

The implications of the judgment are significant, both for lenders and borrowers. It is essential that the parties involved understand the need to draft clear and detailed contracts, in which the borrower's specific obligation is explicitly stated. The lack of such specificity could lead to litigation and, ultimately, to the nullity of the contract.

Furthermore, the judgment draws attention to the need to protect the interests of both parties, emphasizing how a well-structured contract can prevent future legal disputes and ensure compliance with the commitments made.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 15695 of 2024 represents an important reference point in the regulation of conventional purpose loans. It highlights the need for greater attention in the drafting of loan agreements, emphasizing the importance of specifying the obligations and interests of the parties. For legal professionals, this constitutes an invitation to offer targeted assistance and advice, so that loan agreements effectively meet the needs of all parties involved.