During the execution of the state contract, the goods became more expensive due to sanctions - the court found no reason to change the price
The parties entered into a contract for the supply of cheese. During its execution, the manufacturer said that the goods had risen in price due to sanctions. The supplier sent the customer a quotation with an increased cost for certain items and asked to increase the price. Since the customer refused, the counterparty decided to change the contract in court. However, he did not support him:
- the increase in prices due to sanctions is not a reason for changing the contract on the general grounds of Law No. 44. The parties did not reach an agreement to adjust it according to a special rule;
- when concluding a deal, the supplier should take into account all possible scenarios. The rise in prices for goods is attributed to economic, entrepreneurial risks. With the proper degree of care and discretion, they could be predicted in advance;
- the rise in the cost of products cannot be considered a significant change in circumstances. The supplier bears the risk of price increases in the market.
It should be noted that in practice there is an example when price increases due to sanctions during the execution of the contract were not recognized as grounds for terminating the contract.