BGH confirms claims of premium savers against Sparkasse Nürnberg for additional interest payments
The decision of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) on September 24, 2025 (Ref.: XI ZR 29/24) marks a significant step for long-standing premium savers at Sparkasse Nürnberg. The court found that many of the affected savers have a claim to significantly higher back interest payments than previously granted by the bank. The current decision not only affects the concerned savings bank but also has implications for numerous comparable contracts across the country.
Background on the contested premium savings contracts
Since the 1990s, many savings banks have offered so-called long-term premium savings contracts. These contracts provided for basic interest rates, variable interest, and annual premium payments during the contract term. The adjustment of interest rates was contractually reserved for the respective savings bank, with reference to a comparable money market interest rate. Over the years, numerous savings banks adjusted the interest rates at their own discretion and—as the judiciary often found—frequently to the detriment of the savers by lowering them.
At the heart of the current BGH decision are cases where adjustment clauses were not clearly or adequately designed, and the savings banks recalculated the variable interest unilaterally.
Central aspect: Invalid interest adjustment clauses
The highest civil court clearly stated that the interest adjustment clauses used by Sparkasse Nürnberg do not meet the legal transparency requirements and are therefore invalid. In particular, there was a lack of a comprehensible regulation on the parameters and timeframe within which the respective interest rate changes should occur. From the court’s perspective, this deprived consumers of the ability to assess the economic risk and future development of the contract.
Furthermore, the BGH criticized that the savings bank did not use an objectively comprehensible reference interest rate, as required by law and jurisprudence, when determining the variable interest rates.
Impact on the amount of interest claims
The judgment confirms that savings banks must not withhold the originally contractually agreed interest benefits from their premium savers. Rather, they are obliged to recalculate the actually owed interest retroactively, taking into account a market-oriented reference interest rate. In practice, this means affected premium savers may be able to claim substantial back payments. This demand is based on the fact that actual interest yields have often been calculated too low for many years.
The BGH emphasizes the necessity to use customary, publicly accessible interest rates, such as the reference rates published by the Deutsche Bundesbank, as a basis for calculation. An adjustment can take place both upwards and downwards, but what is crucial is always the actual development of the market-typical interest level.
Significance of the judgment for consumers and credit institutions
The BGH’s decision has far-reaching consequences – it affects not only premium savers of Sparkasse Nürnberg but also savers from other institutes whose contracts contain comparable clauses. For affected credit institutions, this can lead to significant back payment obligations. At the same time, the judgment clarifies that a transparent, comprehensible, and objectively measure-based regulation is essential when designing variable interest rates.
For consumers, the judgment provides a basis to review their claims from long-term savings contracts. However, the individual case is always decisive; the particular design of the contract documents and the course of the interest adjustments during the contract term must be taken into account.
Ongoing proceedings and restitution possibilities
It should be noted that certain aspects of the calculation methodology may still be subject to judicial disputes even after the BGH ruling. The determination of the appropriate reference interest rate and the specific implementation of back interest payments can vary from savings bank to savings bank and regularly require precise individual examination.
Furthermore, it must be emphasized that the reclaim of any back payment amounts does not automatically occur but requires an individual assertion by the affected savers. The enforcement of claims is also subject to civil statute of limitations regulations.
Outlook and legal classification
The current jurisdiction of the Federal Court of Justice sets a clear standard for the practice of interest adjustments in long-term savings contracts and emphasizes the need for protection of capital investors in the private customer segment. Credit institutions are urged to tailor their contract design to these guidelines and ensure transparency. In turn, consumers receive a basis for the factual examination of possible back interest claims.
For asserting relevant payment claims, thorough examination and individual assessment of each case are recommended. In particular, the contract documents – including all amendments and adjustment letters – should be carefully reviewed.
Should legal questions arise during the review or assertion of claims from variable interest agreements within the framework of premium savings contracts, personal inquiries to the lawyers at MTR Legal Rechtsanwälte can provide helpful guidance.
