Can the client retreat from the contract for the work 1 year after the performance of the order

In June 2023, I was commissioned to do my decoding work. After more than a year, in August this year, the client filed a suit against me, demanding payment of PLN 20 1000 for alleged defects of works. The client, citing Article 636 of the civilian Code (KC), withdrew from the contract. However, in my opinion, specified withdrawal was unfounded, and in the following article we will look at the details of the substance and the legal provisions that may affect specified a case.

Background

The main charge of the client was that the fragment of the roof made by me was “unesthetic” and “lightly wavy”. The client bought the building material himself, which I informed him about at the phase of the implementation of the works. I indicate that the material utilized was defective, but this did not affect the functionality of the roof. The defects that came out after a year resulted from material quality alternatively than executive errors.

Legal provisions

In accordance with Article 636 KC, where the contractor fails to comply with the contract, the contracting entity may call him to remedy the defects and set an appropriate time limit for their removal. If the contractor fails to comply with the notice, the contracting authority may retreat from the contract or entrust it to another person, at the expense of the contractor. Where the contracting authority has purchased the material itself, it may require their exchange or reimbursement of the cost of the materials.

Clearance after withdrawal from the contract

Article 494 KC speaks of settlements in the event of withdrawal from a common agreement, indicating that a organization withdrawing from a contract may not only request reimbursement of benefits received but besides incur the cost of default. In our case, the withdrawal from the contract so required the settlement of the costs of the work performed and the materials.

Judgment of the Toruń territory Court

The judgement of the Toruń territory Court of 27 March 2023 (Event V GC 49/22/) afraid a akin case where the client besides withdrew from the contract for the work. The Court of First Instance held in this case that the client had no reason to retreat from the contract, since the defects were only aesthetic and did not affect the functionality of the work carried out. The Court found that the elements of the sheet metallic were uneven, but did not ‘delete the performance of the work’.

In the context of warranty for defects, the court pointed out that if the defect was not noticed until after the receipt of the work, then the provisions on warranty for defects apply, but only erstwhile the defect was material. In the case of insignificant aesthetic deficiencies, the liability of the contractor is limited.

Legal effects of withdrawal

In the opinion of the court, withdrawal from the contract was ineffective for 2 main reasons:

1. Too late reaction: In accordance with Article 568(2) and (3) of the KC, withdrawal due to defects is only possible within 1 year of its disclosure. In this case, the defect has already been noticed in the course of work, making the subsequent withdrawal from the contract ineffective.
2. Small weight defect: The Court of First Instance considered that the aesthetic shortcomings were not a material defect which could justify complete withdrawal from the contract.

Conclusion

Article 636 of the CCC and the provisions on warranty for defects govern the issue of withdrawal from the work contract, but it is crucial to realize erstwhile and in what circumstances specified withdrawal is justified. In the present case, the court considered that the client had no reason to retreat from the contract due to the fact that the defect was only aesthetic and did not affect the functionality of the roof. Therefore, the claim for reimbursement was unjustified and the withdrawal from the contract was ineffective.

For those active in construction and roofing work, it is crucial to know their rights and obligations, as well as to accurately paper the state of the work done and the materials utilized to avoid akin disputes in the future.

The information on the website is simply a description of the legal position at the date of publication and is not a legal advice on an individual case. The legal position of publication may change. The law firm is not liable for utilizing an alert to solve legal problems.

You have questions or request aid – welcome to contactOh, my God!