Data
- Date:
- 06-11-2003
- Country:
- Poland
- Number:
- III CZP 61/03
- Court:
- Supreme Court of Poland
- Parties:
Keywords
UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES AS MEANS FOR INTERPRETING DOMESTIC LAW (POLISH LAW)
PENALTY CLAUSES - WHETHER PENALTY IS DUE EVEN WHERE CREDITOR HAD SUFFERED NO LOSS - ANSWER IN THE AFFIRMATIVE - REFERENCE TO ARTICLE 7.4.13 OF UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES
Abstract
Following conflicting decisions by different Chambers of the Supreme Court with respect to the question as to whether under Polish law a contractually stipulated penalty must be paid even where the creditor has suffered no loss, the Supreme Court was requested by the Attorney General to render an interpretative ruling on this issue. The Court, composed of seven Justices, issued the following Resolution: "If the contract provides for payment of a penalty in the case of non-performance or improper performance of an obligation, the debtor is not released from paying it even if it can prove that the creditor has not suffered any damage.”
In its reasons, the Supreme Court mentioned that “the view expressed in this resolution is supported by legal solutions found in regulations of international contract law pertaining to the institution of contractual penalties”, and in this context expressly referred to the UNIDROIT Principles. In particular the Court pointed out that “[i]n Art. 7.4.13 UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts of May 1994 it has been stated that if a contract provides for the payment of penalty in case of default, then the other party shall have the right to claim the agreed amount, regardless of the scope of the incurred damage.”
Fulltext
}}
Source
For a comment of the decision see J. Jastrzebski, Orzecznictwo Sadów Polskich No. 9/2004 (page 115); A. Slisz, Monitor Prawniczy No. 8/2005 (page 406).}}