Glosa do uchwały Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 20 listopada 2019 r., III CZP 3/19

Abstract

The aim of this article is to critically respond to the resolution of the Supreme Court of 20th November 2019 (III CZP 3/19). In the author’s opinion, the resolution of the Supreme Court deserves approval. In the current legal status, there is no possibility of a valid reservation of liquidated damages (in Polish literally referred as a contractual penalty) in case of withdrawal from the contract due to non-performance of an obligation of pecuniary nature. In the author’s opinion, this kind of reservation is contrary to the provisions concerning the legal nature of the statutory right of withdrawal (art. 491 et seq. of the Polish Civil Code), as well as provisions concerning liquidated damages (art. 483 et seq. of the Polish Civil Code). The author approves the final decision of the Supreme Court, however, is critical of its justification. In particular, he notices to the inaccuracies in the concept proposed by the Supreme Court explaining that the liquidated damages reserved in the analysed circumstances are considered invalid. Moreover, he draws attention to the technical and workshop issues of the justification, pointing to chaos and lack of clarity and transparency of the Supreme Court’s arguments.