contract | In Principle

Go to content
Subscribe to newsletter
In principle newsletter subscription form

contract

Compliance and new regulations on payment gridlock
New regulations on payment gridlock entered into force on 1 January 2020, via an amendment to the Act Combatting Excessive Delays in Commercial Transactions of 8 March 2013, the Civil Procedure Code, and the Unfair Competition Act. How will the new rules affect compliance in companies?
Compliance and new regulations on payment gridlock
How can an investor ensure control over the construction process?
The investor is the host of a construction project and, in practice, it is the investor who decides on the wording of the agreement with the general contractor, including the contractor’s activity in execution of the project. It is the investor who decides how the construction process is organised. But investors have different preferences: they do not always want to precisely track the course of works, and that may not be feasible. Therefore, the agreement with the contractor should be tailored to the adopted model of cooperation and take into account the possible level of control by the investor of the general contractor’s activities.
How can an investor ensure control over the construction process?
Guarantee of payment or guarantee of withdrawal from contract?
Art. 6491–6495 of the Civil Code is intended to ensure that the security in the form of a payment guarantee for construction works provided at the investor’s request secures timely payment of the contractor’s fee. However, one may suspect that in practice this instrument is used for a completely different purpose.
Guarantee of payment or guarantee of withdrawal from contract?
How to recover money paid directly to subcontractors?
The parliament has granted subcontractors a high level of protection. The provisions on joint and several liability are strict for the investor and often in practice mean a risk of double payment for the same thing: the first time to the general contractor and the second time to the subcontractor. Therefore, the investor should be able to recover from the general contractor the sums paid directly to subcontractors.
How to recover money paid directly to subcontractors?
Settlements with subcontractors in public procurement
The Public Procurement Law provides for rules autonomous from the Civil Code for settlements with subcontractors. The regulations apply independently of each other, but they are applied in parallel to contracts concluded under the public procurement regime.
Settlements with subcontractors in public procurement
Strict time limits in construction work contracts
W polskiej praktyce obrotu gospodarczego od dłuższego czasu budzi wątpliwości możliwość skutecznego wprowadzenia w umowach o roboty budowlane klauzul nakładających na jedną ze stron kontraktu obowiązek powiadomienia drugiej strony o okolicznościach uprawniających do żądania dodatkowej zapłaty za wynagrodzenie. Klauzule te wywodzą się z kontraktów zawieranych na wzorcach umownych FIDIC, opracowanych przez Międzynarodową Federację Inżynierów Konsultantów.
Strict time limits in construction work contracts
Covering the cost of alterations to premises under leases
The question of payment of the cost of alterations made to leased premises by a tenant is an important issue in the relationship between the tenant and the landlord. There are many factors affecting arrangements as to the cost of alterations, such as the duration of the lease, the premises leased, and the envisaged outlays on the part of the tenant.
Covering the cost of alterations to premises under leases
Indemnity – when is it due and in what amount?
Disputes concerning indemnity arise under an agency agreement. This payment does not become due automatically, as there are certain requirements. This payment is due on the basis of equity and is intended to give an agent a share in the profits they help to generate.
Indemnity – when is it due and in what amount?
Public procurement contracts under the new framework: A clear step toward balancing the parties’ positions
The unique characteristics of public procurements should not impede a balanced allocation of risks between the parties. However, despite efforts by various groups this goal has remained unattainable. The drafters of the new Public Procurement Law have recognised the problems related to the parties’ unequal positions and proposed several remedies.
Public procurement contracts under the new framework: A clear step toward balancing the parties’ positions
Is an unexamined complaint an approved complaint?
The Act on Consideration of Complaints by Financial Market Entities and on the Financial Ombudsman provides that a complaint not resolved within the stated period “is regarded as” resolved in accordance with the customer’s request. In a surprising resolution, the Supreme Court recently ruled that this does not mean that a delay in consideration of a complaint mandates that it is resolved in the customer’s favour, but such a delay merely increases the burden faced by the entity during litigation. If, of course, the matter ever reaches the courts. Was this what the legislature intended?
Is an unexamined complaint an approved complaint?
Is a contract valid if the content does not correspond to a company’s scope of business?
The consequences of a transaction falling outside the scope of business specified in the articles of association.
Is a contract valid if the content does not correspond to a company’s scope of business?
A mistrust of trusts?
In common-law jurisdictions, the trust is a popular form for achieving various aims: managing assets, inheritance, building corporate structures, and tax planning. But countries from the Continental legal tradition, like Poland, typically do not have any institution directly corresponding to a trust. Polish doesn’t even have a word for it. This has raised doubts over the years and sometimes even suspicion on the part of courts and lawyers when they need to determine the consequences exerted by a trust in actual or potential disputes in jurisdictions unfamiliar with this form. Are their suspicions well-founded?
A mistrust of trusts?