| In Principle

As a result of the parliament’s intervention, mutual obligations of parties to lease agreements in shopping centres are deemed to have “expired.” Does that mean that the lease agreements have expired?

Declaration of a state of epidemiological threat and then a state of epidemic, and other legal acts, entails not only introduction of commands and prohibitions in everyday and professional life but also various types of restrictions on business operations. Doctors may be directed to work in hospitals for infectious diseases. Businesses are saddled with new restrictions causing them to generate significant losses. Can damages be sought from the State Treasury due to these restrictions?

No one expects the Polish State Treasury to bear full responsibility for businesses’ losses due to the coronavirus epidemic. However, the regulations should provide some recompense for parties injured by the introduction of sweeping commands, limitations and prohibitions on business operations. This is required first and foremost by concern for the state of the national economy for which businesses are the driving force.

The pandemic requires immediate response and rapid launch of solutions for combating the coronavirus and its socio-economic impacts. Thus the Anti-Crisis Act includes provisions allowing contracts for fighting the pandemic to be awarded without following lengthy formal procedures.

As a result of the pandemic, many planned and existing contracts have been paralysed. The uncertain situation forces the parties to cease performing contracts or at least poses barriers to performance. In this situation, can they change the contract? Will they have to pay contractual penalties and damages? The Anti-Crisis Act comes to their aid.

One method companies have of dealing with the crisis is to cooperate with their rivals. But before entering into such cooperation, it is worth examining whether it constitutes a conspiracy subject to sanctions from the national competition authority, the European Commission or other antitrust bodies.

The president of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) has declared war on sellers unfairly raising prices of products during the COVID-19 pandemic. One of the instruments proposed by the regulator in combating this pathology is establishment by the Ministry of Development of maximum prices and margins on products essential from the perspective of consumers’ interests (a change included in the recent amendment to the Anti-Crisis Act). On this occasion it is worth reviewing the authority vested in the president of UOKiK to regulate product prices under current law.

The amendment to the Anti-Crisis Act includes proposals drafted by the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK), intended to increase the financial security of households, ensure access to vital goods and services, and combat price speculation and unjustified increases.

In light of the difficulties associated with the coronavirus epidemic, and joining the global trend under the hashtag #flattenthecurve, competition authorities around the world, including Poland, are introducing, more or less officially, extraordinary operating procedures to avoid spreading the coronavirus. This can have a major impact on proceedings before these authorities, including filing and consideration of applications seeking approval of concentrations.

The coronavirus epidemic is generating new problems for parties to business transactions: restrictions on business operations, supply disruptions, limited availability of staff and materials, changes in the operation of public bodies and post offices. The downtime they cause has effects not only on civil-law grounds. In addition, there is the issue of expiry of administrative permits. Do the existing regulations, and the new Anti-Crisis Shield, offer any solution?

Many investors currently carrying out construction projects or planning to start them in the near future ask us about the legal possibilities to suspend a project or even withdraw from existing contracts. The question arises whether it makes sense to continue or start projects when implementation will require large financial capital and considerable resources. In this article, we identify legal instruments that may be available to an investor who would decide to stop the performance of works or definitively withdraw from a construction contract.

The pandemic may delay the performance of construction works and increase their costs. It may even make it completely impossible for a contractor to fulfil its obligations. But how this affects the contractors’ legal situation depends on the factual circumstances of the given case and the wording of the specific construction contract.