Abstract

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: The aim of the article is to present the shortcomings of the solution provided for in Art. 15ze of the special COVID Act.

THE RESEARCH PROBLEM AND METHODS: The key problem raised in the article is the question of the admissibility of interference by the legislator in contractual relations between entrepreneurs in the way it happened in Poland in connection with the COVID epidemic.Considerations carried out using, typical
in jurisprudence, formal and dogmatic method.

THE PROCESS OF ARGUMENTATION: The article presents the essence of the solution provided for in Art. 15ze of the special COVID Act, the justification for its adoption, constitutional and legal doubts and errors in the legislative technique. Finally, comments were also made regarding the economic effectiveness of the provision and critical conclusions.

RESEARCH RESULTS: The analysis showed that the commented provision of Art. 15ze of the COVID Special Act does not correspond to the constitutional framework, is harmful to its addressees and is an example of “epidemic patholegislation”: defective, hasty, economically ineffective.

CONCLUSIONS, INNOVATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Although the analyzed provision is no longer in force, the fate of the provision of Art. 15ze of the special COVID Act and the experiences related to it should
become a valuable lesson for the future for the legislator, who will plan statutory interference in contractual legal relations between entrepreneurs.