Replacement of low-quality goods did not save the supplier from a fine for improper execution of the state contract
The customer identified a low-quality product during acceptance.
The supplier replaced the products within the delivery time.
The customer paid for the goods and demanded a fine for improper performance of the contract. The supplier did not agree with this: he replaced the product, and the customer accepted it and paid for it. In this case, a penalty for late delivery is allowed.
The opinions of the courts were divided. The first instance supported the customer.
The appeal took a different position. It assessed the delivery of the defective goods with subsequent replacement as late delivery. There are no grounds for a fine, and the customer did not present a penalty for delay.
The cassation court overturned this decision and supported the first instance. Neither the Law N 44-FZ, nor the contract does not establish that the replacement of goods exempts from liability for poor-quality delivery.
The Russian Armed Forces did not review the case.
Note that in practice there is another opinion.
Document:
Definition of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 12.04.2021 N 307-ES21-3342