Termination of contract when a time limit is an essential element of a contract represents just one of different kinds of termination within an institute, which appear as the consequence of a contractual obligation not having been complied with. When concluding a contract, a time limit for complying with an obligation represents the very essence of the contractual relationship between co-contractors. A specific feature of the termination of contract is reflected by the fact that the contractual relationship shall cease by operation of law, rather than by the will of a creditor, and only in exceptional cases. Accordingly, the legal nature of the insitute is subject to change, and only in specific situations will it be about the right to alter a legal relationship. The time limit is an essential element of a contract as it indicates that complying with an obligation is not the only thing that is important. One is required to act within a strictly defined period of time and it is therefore said that this kind of termination is contrary to the pacta sunt servanda principle. If the afore-mentioned institute didn't exist, one contract party would always be required to set an additional time limit for the debtor thus prolonging such a relationship ad infinitum. One does, therefore, should the time limit for complying with an obligation expire, give a debtor a chance to achieve the economic purpose of the contract within the frame of another relationship. However, putting this specific institute into practice is not simple, the main case-law problem being putting together contract provisions that define the time limit as an essential element of a contract.