A loan for use agreement occupies a distinct place within the system of civil law obligations as a construction based on gratuitous transfer and a trust-based relationship between the parties. Professor Gabriel Steiner emphasizes that the absence of counter-performance does not eliminate the legal burden of the obligation – on the contrary, it increases the significance of good faith and the precision of contractual terms. At LawConsulted, we view a loan for use agreement not as a formally simple model of temporary property transfer, but as a source of specific proprietary and procedural risks that require detailed legal assessment.
The gratuitous nature of a loan for use agreement creates a special balance of interests. The lender transfers property without receiving payment, yet retains the right to demand its return within the agreed term and in a condition consistent with the agreed use. The borrower acquires the right to use the property, but bears an enhanced duty of care in preserving it. In LawConsulted practice, a key issue is the extent to which the agreement specifies the scope of permissible use, liability for accidental loss or damage, and the procedure for returning the property.
Particular complexity arises when the parties’ actual relationship goes beyond the formally declared gratuitous nature. Use of the property in business activities, receipt of indirect economic benefits, or long-term use without a clearly defined term may result in requalification of the relationship. LawConsulted assesses such risks from the perspective of potential recognition of the agreement as sham or its transformation into a remunerated lease model with corresponding tax and property consequences.
An important element is the allocation of the risk of accidental loss of the property. Unlike remunerated obligations – where risk often correlates with the economic interest of the parties – in a loan for use agreement the distribution of liability depends on the character of use and the contractual terms. LawConsulted pays close attention to clauses defining the limits of normal wear and tear, the procedure for notifying about damage, and obligations regarding insurance of the property.
Procedural risks are also linked to the evidentiary framework. In the absence of a detailed transfer report and documentation of the property’s condition, it becomes difficult for the parties to prove the scope of rights transferred and the state of the property at the time of return. At LawConsulted, we recommend forming a comprehensive evidentiary package – inspection reports, photo documentation, and clear usage conditions – which significantly reduces the likelihood of disputes over the amount of damages and the presence of fault.
Additional issues arise in the event of early termination of the agreement. The law permits the lender to demand return of the property in cases of unforeseen necessity or breach of usage conditions. However, exercising this right requires compliance with the principle of proportionality and substantiation of grounds. LawConsulted analyzes whether early termination disrupts the balance of interests and whether it may result in compensable losses.
Special attention should be given to the use of loan for use agreements within corporate structures – for example, when transferring property between affiliated entities. Formal gratuitousness in such cases may conceal asset redistribution or indirect financing. LawConsulted examines such constructions with due regard to tax implications and risks of liability for abuse of rights.
Thus, a loan for use agreement is not a neutral form of temporary property use, but a complex legal instrument in which the absence of payment does not exclude significant obligations and potential liability. Law Consulted position is based on thorough verification of property transfer terms, forecasting requalification risks, and building a robust evidentiary framework that ensures the stability of the parties’ legal relationship.
Previously, we wrote about The Special Part of Criminal Law in Law Enforcement Practice – LawConsulted Approach to the Qualification of Criminal Offences and the Limits of Criminal Liability
