Abstract

The article questions the sense and need to use the generalized notion of sanction in civil law, where that notion is non-specific, vague and ambiguous. In civil law (unlike e.g. in criminal or administrative law) sanctions refer not only to the duties arising from the law, but also those set under a contract. The difference concerns, in particular, how realization of civil law duties is supported by the use of state coercion. In civil law the notion of sanction covers diverse phenomena. The article points out the importance of dispositive provisions for the liberty of contracts and defining sanction as a consequence of the defectiveness of conventional transactions, as well as invalidity of the absolute transaction entered into. Then, the authoress goes on to discuss specificity of restitutive sanction (the duty to redress a damage (ex delicto) and/or return the illegally attained enrichment). The multitude of the types of sanction (understood as a breach of any duty) is a characteristic feature of civil law. As a result, the use of the generalized notion of “sanction in civil law” is of little use and inoperative. On the other hand, civil law, with its expanded dogmatics of sanctions of individual types, especially restitutive, may serve as a source of inspiration also for other branches of law (especially for public law).