Search for cases

Editorial remark
by Maciej Kochanowski

The respondent was receiving deliveries from the claimant for about 2 years. During this time (according to respondent), most of deliveries were paid in cash and no confirmation of payment was issued or demanded. The claimant sued for the price of some of the deliveries claiming they had never been paid. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the first instance awarding the claimant the amount in dispute and changing only the interest rate according to Czech law. The Court of Appeal stated that there is no reason to say that there was a binding practice between the parties according to which no confirmation of payment was issued, as such conduct would be – from the perspective of the buyer (respondent) – completely irrational and not in line with the model of a reasonable professional. Contrary to the respondent's opinion, there were no grounds to assume that the economic crisis forced the respondent to ignore the model of the reasonable professional in order to acquire income and forced the respondent to “be more flexible with the formalities” and “act outside the box” in that regard.