Zgoda inwestora na zawarcie umowy podwykonawczej. Glosa do wyroku Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 4 lutego 2011 r. (III CSK 152/10)
Investor’s consent to the conclusion of subcontract. Comments to the judgment of Polish Supreme Court III CSK 152/10
Author(s): Tomasz MarekSubject(s): Law, Constitution, Jurisprudence, Civil Law
Published by: Wielkopolska Rada Młodzieży
Keywords: comments;investor’s consent;Polish Supreme Court;subcontract with documentation;
Summary/Abstract: In the article, author discusses the issue of the appropriate form for the investor’s consent to the conclusion of subcontract between contractor and subcontractor. The publication is a comment to the judgment of Polish Supreme Court from 4th February 2011 (III CSK 152/10). In this verdict, Supreme Court decide, that on the ground of article 6471 par. 2 of Polish Civil Code, the investor can give the consent to the subcontract not only explicitly or in a tacit way, but also by implication (art. 60 of Civil Code). In such case, SC is of opinion, that the investor’s consent is not conditioned by the prior reception of the subcontract with relevant documentation. Author points out several arguments against the admission of the consent by implication on the ground of article 6471 of Civil Code. The article contains also some reservations (concerning the lack of duty to send the subcontract with documentation to investor), which should be made in case of the acceptance of Supreme Court’s point of view.
Journal: Przegląd prawniczy ekonomiczny i społeczny
- Issue Year: 2014
- Issue No: 2
- Page Range: 108-118
- Page Count: 11
- Language: Polish