In practice, it is often the case that the term “work contract” is used interchangeably with “assignment.” Although the boundary between the two is sometimes blurred, each of these contracts is intended to serve a different purpose and therefore has distinct characteristics.
One-time or repetitive activity?
The simplest way to distinguish a contract of mandate from a contract of work is to determine whether its subject matter concerns a one-time activity, or whether it is, however, the performance of a given service over a longer period of time. In the first case, we will usually be dealing with a work. Figuratively speaking, this can be defined as an order from a contractor for a specific service, such as writing a poem, conducting a training course, painting a picture. If, on the other hand, the contract is for a repetitive activity, it should most likely be a contract of mandate. An example in this case would be the operation of an office by an IT specialist, whose job is to maintain equipment on an ongoing basis and fix any faults that arise.
Diligent action vs. result
Related to the above is another feature that differentiates the two types of contracts. The main purpose of a work contract is to achieve a specific result (e.g., making furniture, writing a book, sewing a suit). The ordering party should specify what the work should look like, or what it should serve. In a contract of mandate, on the other hand, the most important thing is the diligent work of the contractor – it is not concluded to achieve a specific (final) result that will end the contract, but to receive a certain type of service over a period of time.
Consequences
Each of the aforementioned types of contract has separate code regulations. One of the most important issues is responsibility for the service rendered – the contractor of the work is burdened with greater responsibility than the contractor. In the case of a contract for a work of art, the ordering party (the “recipient of the work”) therefore has much broader possibilities of complaint.
Another important fact is the very limited possibility of withdrawal from a contract for work. The Code lists specific situations when this may occur. A contract of commission, on the other hand, can be freely terminated.
You can read about the difference between withdrawal and termination HERE
As far as contribution issues are concerned, in the case of a contract for specific work there is no obligation to pay social security contributions (however, as of January 1, 2021, there is an obligation to report some of such contracts to the Social Security Institution within 7 days of their conclusion – for the time being, this obligation is of an informational and control nature only and does not update the necessity to pay contributions). The situation is different with orders, which, as a rule, give rise to the obligation to pay contributions for pension, disability and accident insurance.
Service contract – subcategory.
There is another institution related to the subject under discussion. This is a contract for the provision of services. Although the Code does not provide a separate regulation for it, in practice it is quite common due to the principle of freedom of contract. Thus, if it is the will of the parties to regulate the relations linking them in a way not provided for in the regulations, a good way is to conclude precisely a contract for the provision of services. Importantly, the provisions on commission apply to this type of contract.
Lack of a clear boundary between a work contract and a commission contract
Finally, it is worth emphasizing again that the boundary between a contract for work and a commission is sometimes fluid; in some cases it is difficult to immediately clearly indicate which type of relationship we are dealing with. For example, conducting a series of meetings for several groups of participants, depending on, among other things, what period it covers and what system of financial settlements has been adopted, can be classified as both a commission and a work. Similarly – a contract for the realization of a concert or the conduct of an event – often in the opinion of a lawyer will be a contract for a work of art, and in the opinion of HR and accounting it will be closer to a contract of mandate.
Rozwiązanie, wypowiedzenie i odstąpienie są bardzo często wymiennie używane dla opisania sposobu zakończenia obowiązywania umowy. Takie uproszczenie może przynieść niekorzystne konsekwencje, ponieważ te trzy instytucje cechują się zupełnie innym charakterem i skutkiem.
