On 27 April 2017 Advocate General Wahl issued his opinion in the case of a group of Romanian borrowers who took out loans from Banca Româneasc─â in Swiss francs (CHF). The agreement stipulated that the loan be repaid in CHF. However, the exchange rate between CHF and the Romanian leu (RON) practically doubled between 2007 and 2014 and the borrowers brought an action before the Romanian courts, arguing that the currency repayment term in the loan agreement was unfair as the bank was in a position to foresee such fluctuations. AG Wahl observed that loan agreements in foreign currency are generally subject to a lower rate of interest than those in national currency, in consideration of the ‘foreign exchange risk’ to which they may give rise in the event of a fall in the value of the national currency. According to Wahl the seller or supplier does not have to anticipate and inform the consumer of subsequent changes which are not foreseeable, such as the exchange rate fluctuations. It is necessary to take into account all the circumstances that the seller or supplier could reasonably have envisaged at the time of conclusion of the contract. Whether there is a significant imbalance between the rights and obligations of the parties is not to be assessed by reference to developments subsequent to the conclusion of the contract which are outside the seller or supplier’s control and which he could not have anticipated. Protection of consumers does not mean that banks are expected to go further than their obligation to deal in a fair manner to the extent of anticipating future events arising after the conclusion of the agreement. We will now have to wait for the decision of the CJEU and see whether it will affirm the views of the AG. Looking at its 2014 judgment in the (similar) Kàsler case there might be a chance it will decide differently.