Warranty disputes are disputes over the breach of contractual obligations, and in Georgia there is no separate "warranty act": the legal basis of warranty claims lies in the general norms of the Civil Code — damages for breach of obligation, the additional period and refusal of the contract, and the norm on breach of the conditions of delivery of property in leasing relations.
The Claim for Damages on Breach of Obligation
Upon the debtor's breach of an obligation, the creditor may demand compensation for the damage caused thereby. This rule does not apply where the debtor bears no liability for the breach — the exclusion of liability excludes compensation as well.
Upon the debtor's delay, the creditor may set the debtor a period necessary for the performance of the obligation. If the debtor does not perform even within that time, the creditor has the right, instead of performance, to demand compensation for the damage. Determining an additional period is unnecessary if it is obvious that it will have no consequence, or when special circumstances exist which, considering the interests of both parties, justify the immediate application of the claim for damages.
The Additional Period and Refusal of the Contract
If one party to a bilateral contract breaches an obligation arising from it, the other party may refuse the contract after the expiry in vain of the additional period determined by it for performance. If, given the character of the breach, an additional period is not applicable, a warning is equalled to the determination of an additional period.
If the obligation is breached only in part, the creditor may refuse the contract only where the performance of the remaining part has lost its interest for him. Setting an additional period or a warning is not necessary if it is obvious that they will have no result; if the obligation was not performed within the period determined by the contract and the creditor tied the continuation of the relationship to timely performance; or if, given special grounds and considering bilateral interests, the immediate termination of the contract is justified.
Refusal of the contract is impermissible if: the breach of the obligation is insignificant; particular statutory requirements are breached and, despite this, the creditor may demand that the contract remain in force; the creditor is wholly or predominantly responsible for the breach; or the demand is opposed by a set-off that the debtor has already presented or will present immediately after the refusal. The creditor may refuse the contract even before the arrival of the performance period if it is obvious that grounds for refusal will arise; the debtor, in turn, may set the creditor a reasonable period for the refusal.
Breach of the Conditions of Delivery of Property in Leasing
If the property was not delivered to the lessee, was delivered late, or does not conform to the conditions of the leasing contract, the lessee has the right not to accept the property and to demand from the supplier property that will conform to the conditions of the contract, and/or to demand damages from it. Upon breach of the conditions of delivery, the risk of loss or damage of the property remains with the supplier.
How to Build a Warranty Claim
In preparing a warranty dispute there are three steps: first, establish the fact and character of the breach (total or partial, by delay or non-conformity); second, decide whether you seek performance with an additional period, or damages and refusal of the contract; third, document both the breach and the damage. The general norms of the Civil Code govern precisely these choices, and their exact application determines the outcome of the dispute.
The Interplay of the General Rules
The system of these norms of the Civil Code rests on one logic: first you seek performance (an additional period or a warning), then — if it is futile — you move to stricter remedies (damages and refusal of the contract). To this is added that refusal is limited: an insignificant breach, the creditor's responsibility, and a set-off block it. Such a structure expresses the balance between the stability of the contract and proportionality.
The leasing norm is a concrete example of applying this system: non-delivery, late delivery, or non-conformity of property raises the same choices — refusal to accept, a demand for conforming property, or damages — with the additional rule of leaving the risk with the supplier. It is a good illustration of how the general restitutory instruments work in a special relationship.
Frequently Asked Questions
When may damages be claimed?
On breach, where the debtor is not relieved of liability; on delay, the creditor sets an additional period and after its futile expiry claims damages instead of performance.
When is an additional period unnecessary?
Where it is evident it would produce no result, where the creditor tied continuation to timely performance by contract, or where special circumstances justify claiming damages immediately in both parties’ interest.
Is refusal of the contract possible on partial breach?
Only where performance of the remaining part has lost interest for the creditor; on insignificant breach, refusal is inadmissible.
What right has a leasing recipient on non-conforming delivery?
To refuse the property and demand conforming property and/or damages; the risk of loss or damage remains with the supplier.
How We Help on Legal.ge
The lawyers of Legal.ge build the position in warranty disputes consistently: verifying the contractual formalization of the warranty, assessing circumstances excluding liability, choosing the correct sequence of instruments and documenting both the breach and the loss. The challenge of a warranty dispute is that a "warranty" as a concept is a contractual condition, and its breach is resolved by the general norms of obligation. The code gives you the full toolkit: damages, the additional period, a warning, refusal of the contract, and the special rule for partial breach. The correct sequence of these instruments is the key to a successful warranty claim.