The settlement of mutual performances rendered under contracts subsequently held to be void constitutes one of the more enduring doctrinal problems of the law of unjust enrichment. The question has acquired renewed practical significance in Poland in the
wake of judgments declaring foreign-currency-indexed and foreign-currency-denominated loan agreements null and void, and in the light of the divergent jurisprudence that has emerged in their aftermath. In this context, the possibility of applying the balance theory (German: Saldotheorie) has gained attention. The present study undertakes a comparative examination of the doctrinal foundations of the balance theory in German jurisprudence and of its statutory counterpart in the Georgian Civil Code, and it assesses the compatibility of the theory with the structural premises of the Polish regime governing the restitution of performances rendered without legal cause. It is submitted that the rationale underlying the balance theory — namely, the mitigation of the asymmetric distribution of risk that arises in contracts involving non-monetary performance — does not obtain in the context of void loan agreements, in which the performances of both parties are pecuniary in character. The reception of the balance theory in Polish
jurisprudence concerning void loan agreements is therefore both structurally inapposite and functionally otiose.
You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.
