Abstract

The text tackles the problem of the extent of application of Art. 751.2 of the Civil Code. The provision in question sets forth the period of limitation for claims arising from selected types of service contracts. The choice between one of the concepts of interpretation of this provision is of key importance for the period of limitation under various less typical service contracts, as partially illustrated by the resolution of the Supreme Court of 21 October 2015 r., III CZP 67/15. According to the traditional and widespread interpretation the said contracts ought to be understood as falling into the scope of Art. 750 of the Civil Code – i.e. not being regulated in other provisions. In other words, under these premises, Art. 751.2 must be read in direct and inseparable connection with the preceding Article, introducing an exceptional period of limitation only for the contracts that have not been regulated elsewhere. The text opts, however, for an alternative understanding – discussing arguments in favour of the autonomous application of Art. 751.2. This leads to the conclusion that the discussed provision ought to be applicable regardless of the criteria introduced in the preceding one, i.e. without a need to refer to any other existing regulation of the particular contract, assessing its adequacy and intensity from the perspective of Art. 750. This understanding seems more coherent with the function and origins of Art. 751.2 and more convenient in practical application. The fact that both provisions are next to one another in the structure of the Civil Code seems, at the same time, not a definitive argument in favour of interpreting them jointly.