Seller’s claim related to the defectiveness of the sold item

The Civil Code in Articles 576(1) to 576(4) regulates recourse claims of a seller who has incurred costs as a result of the consumer exercising rights under the warranty for certain physical defects of the sold item, i.e. recourse claims against previous sellers of that item.

Importantly, these provisions also apply if the seller has fulfilled the warranty rights exercised by a buyer who is a sole trader registered in the CEIDG (Central Registration and Information on Business), concluding a sales contract directly connected to their business activity, where from the terms of the contract it follows that the contract did not have a professional character for that person, particularly in relation to the type of business they conduct. In other words, this concerns situations where a sole trader concluded a sales contract unrelated directly to the sector or specialisation in which that trader professionally operates. For example, this applies to a dentist who buys a computer for their practice to manage patient registration and keep medical records in electronic form.

Recourse claims under the warranty based on these provisions may be made if all of the following conditions are met:

1. The goods have one of the following defects:
2. they lack the properties they should have according to their intended purpose or according to publicly made assurances by the manufacturer or their representative, the person who introduced the item into circulation in the course of their business, or the person who, by placing their name, trademark, or other distinguishing mark on the sold item, presents themselves as the manufacturer; or
3. they were delivered in an incomplete state;
4. The final seller has already incurred costs as a result of exercising warranty rights for physical defects of the item by the consumer or sole trader (as understood above);
5. The defect arose as a result of the action or omission of the previous seller;
6. There is a causal link between the existence of the defect and the damage incurred by the final seller.

It is important that under these provisions the seller could bring recourse claims under the warranty directly against previous sellers of the goods, even if no sales contract was concluded between them. Liability under these provisions applies to a previous seller who, knowing about the defect, failed to inform the buyer or prepared an installation and start-up manual attached to the item, if the defect arose as a result of installation and start-up by the consumer (or the sole trader mentioned above) in accordance with that manual.
 

Liability of the previous seller under such recourse claims is limited to compensation covering the reimbursement of expenses necessary to fulfil the consumer’s (or sole trader’s) rights, particularly costs related to replacement or removal of the defect of the sold item, its dismantling, transport, and reinstallation, as well as the amount by which the price of the item was reduced, and lost profits, e.g. in case of the consumer’s withdrawal from the sales contract requiring refund of the price.

It is worth emphasising that the limitation period for such recourse claims is short – it is 6 months. The limitation period begins on the day the seller incurs costs resulting from the exercise of warranty rights by the consumer (or sole trader), but no later than the day on which the seller was obliged to perform their warranty duties. If the seller fails to pursue recourse claims within this period under these provisions, they may seek claims under general rules, i.e. contractual or tortious liability.

The liability under Articles 576(1)–576(4) of the Civil Code primarily differs from the standard warranty liability in commercial transactions in that it cannot be excluded or limited.