News
20.10.2022
Our major court cases
Changes to exploitation laws that benefit consumers
The provisions of the Civil Code on exploitation are an important tool to protect the interests of the weaker party to the contract. It is used by people exploited by the contractor due to their forced position (e.g. urgent need to repay debt), infirmity (e.g. due to serious illness) or inexperience (may be due to young age). The legislator aims to make it easier for these people to avoid the negative consequences of the concluded contract. The amendment to the Civil Code of June 30, 2022 significantly extended this protection.
The first change in the scope of the regulation in question is the provision of legal protection also to persons who lack sufficient knowledge of the subject of the contract. This change will apply to situations in which a party, taking advantage of the contractor’s lack of knowledge about the subject of the contract, will aim to conclude a contract on terms that are grossly unfavorable to him, which will result in inadequacy of benefits (e.g. gross overpricing).
In addition, until recently, a person claiming exploitation could only demand a reduction in his benefit or an increase in the benefit due to him from the contractor, and only in a situation where both would be excessively difficult, he could demand the annulment of the contract. The amendment to Article 388 of the Civil Code, on the other hand, allows injured persons to demand the annulment of the contract , regardless of whether the modification of the scope of the parties’ obligations would be excessively difficult.
The legislator also introduced a presumption that if the value of the performance of one of the parties at the time of conclusion of the contract exceeds at least twice the value of the performance of the other party, it grossly exceeds it. This means that if the above circumstance is proven in the course of the proceedings, the burden of proof to prove that the disproportion is not glaring will rest with the party accused of exploitation. The introduction of the above presumption makes it easier for the weaker party to the contract to defend its rights in court, as it will only bear the burden of proving a specific difference in the amount of the parties’ benefits.
The last change introduced in the regulation in question is the extension of the time limit within which the exploited party will be able to exercise the right to demand modification or cancellation of the contract. Under the previous legal status, this period, regardless of the nature of the contract, was two years from the date of its conclusion. It has been extended to three years in the case of a contract concluded between entrepreneurs, and to six years in the case of a contract concluded by a consumer.
To sum up , the changes made in the scope of the provision in question extend the rights of the weaker party to the contract by enabling it to choose a more convenient form of defending its rights in a longer period of time from the date of conclusion of the contract, as well as by facilitating proving gross incommensurability of benefits. The protection guaranteed by the provisions on exploitation is important because, unlike the provisions on abusive clauses, it may lead to a court review of the price or remuneration that the entrepreneur reserves in exchange for the goods sold or services provided.
Marcin Chmiel
Legal trainee