EN
The subject of this publication is to determine whether it is permissible and effective to reserve the analyzed clause in a contract concluded under the Public Procurement Law, due to the content of Art. 483 § 1 of the Civil Code - allowing for a contractual penalty only in the event of non-performance or improper performance of a non-pecuniary obligation. The analyzed clause raises the same doubts as to its effectiveness as the contractual penalty for failure to pay or delayed payment of remuneration due to the subcontractor or further subcontractors, referred to in Article 143d (1) (7a) of the Act of January 29, 2004. - Public procurement law (equivalent to Article 437 paragraph 1 item 7a of the Public Procurement Law). In order to answer the above question, it is necessary to establish the legal nature of the analyzed clause and whether the provision of Art. 436 point 4a of the Public Procurement Law is a lex specialis in relation to Article 483 §1 of the Civil Code. A similar problem has already been resolved by the Supreme Court (i.e. it concerned the admissibility of stipulating a contractual penalty in a construction contract concluded under the old Public Procurement Law for non-payment or untimely payment of remuneration due to a subcontractor or further subcontractor, as referred to in Article 143d (1)) point 7a of the old Public Procurement Law). However, this resolution did not resolve the problems related to the relation of Art. 143d section 1 point 7a of the old Public Procurement Law to the provisions of the Civil Code on contractual penalty, and on the contrary - introduced even greater difficulties in interpreting this regulation of the old Public Procurement Law. Thus, it is advisable to take up the issues being the subject of this publication.