Abstract
In the opinion of the Supreme Court, one may talk about the subsidiary nature of board members’ liability only in the colloquial sense of the word and only because, as in the case of subsidiary responsibility sensu stricto, Art. 299 of the Commercial Companies Code provides for the need of an attempt to obtain the performance from another person (in this case from a limited liability company). Despite a clear-cut resolution in this respect, the commented judgment indicates the complexity and heterogeneity of the issues of liability of members of the management board of a limited liability company towards its creditors exercised as liability for damages. Given the vague position of the doctrine in this matter, the established jurisprudence is difficult to consider as having been finally resolved in the Polish legal order, which underlain taking the position and putting forward a de lege ferenda postulate in this respect.