I think the point of these court cases were of fairness, not of terms and conditions!
If I were to produce a service and include within the terms and conditions of the contract a clause that meant the customer had to pay £500 to cancel the service, I could argue that it is in the terms and conditions and anyone dumb enough to sign owed me £500 for cancelling. But the law might not see it that way! I would be governed by fair play rules..
And this whole fight has been over how fair are the banks.
But the impressive part was how they changed their stance during their defence. They did not argue that the charges were unfair, they argued that to be forced to repay years of unfair charges would put many of them out of business.
There is no such thing as free banking, it is a myth. But the current system charges those who are worst off with heavy fines for slight errors but if you can stay above water then they are okay with that... You get a free ride
