Victory in the commercial trial – the court sided with Hoogells and the rules of logic

We are pleased to announce a favorable court ruling for our Client (a company from the construction sector), represented by Hoogells as the defendant. The proceedings concerned a claim for payment of contractual penalties or damages (the legal nature was not immediately clear), imposed on a subcontractor for delays in remedying defects during the warranty period.  

The case was handled on behalf of the Firm by Łukasz Kotarba

This court victory is worth highlighting due to several practical takeaways from the course of the proceedings:

• It is justified to apply the provisions of commercial proceedings with respect to the auxiliary (non-mandatory) nature of witness testimony – Article 458¹⁰ of the Polish Code of Civil Procedure – a provision that is still often cautiously interpreted as requiring such evidence.
• Witness evidence may (and should) be omitted in commercial proceedings if it is unnecessary and the facts have already been established through other means of proof.
• Including in a subcontract an obligation to pay a contractual penalty based on penalties imposed on the general contractor by the investor does not guarantee the desired legal effect.
• Such a clause does not automatically qualify as a contractual penalty clause, which has implications for the burden of proof – claims brought under Article 471 of the Polish Civil Code (general rules of contractual liability) require a different approach than those under Article 483 (contractual penalty).
• Template-based drafting of contractual penalty clauses, or mindless copying from other contracts (even those related by subject or parties), often fails to hold up in court.

The case also served as a reminder of a fundamental principle of civil litigation in the context of the plaintiff’s claims.

The court proceedings, the evidence presented, and the rules of logic must give rise to a legal conviction of the court as to the merits of the claim. We are pleased that – also thanks to the efforts of our Firm – no such conviction arose in this case.