An Error in Software Code as a Legally Significant Defect of the Result of Civil-Law Works in the Digital Environment

The digital transformation of civil circulation has radically reshaped traditional conceptions of the results of civil-law works. Software has ceased to function merely as an auxiliary technical tool and is increasingly becoming an independent object of contractual interest. Unlike tangible results of work, digital products lack stable physical characteristics and cannot be subjected to a comprehensive quality assessment at the moment of delivery to the customer. Their properties emerge gradually in the course of operation, integration into the technological environment, and interaction with user practices. Under these conditions, traditional notions of defectiveness of the result of work, developed with reference to the material world, lose their universal character. An error in software code represents a phenomenon of a different order: it may coexist with the functional suitability of the software product for a prolonged period and does not always transform into a legally significant defect. The purpose of this study is to identify the legal significance of errors in software code and to formulate criteria for their qualification as defects in the result of civil-law works. The article examines the legal nature of software as a result of work, distinguishes between permissible manifestations of technical complexity and defects having legal relevance, and determines the scope and limits of the developer’s civil liability. The study employs formal-legal, functional, and systemic approaches, complemented by an analysis of doctrinal sources and judicial practice. The study substantiates the conclusion that an error in software code, by itself, does not indicate improper quality of the result of work. The legal significance of such an error emerges exclusively in context - through its impact on the achievement of the contractual purpose, the conditions of software operation, and the limits of the developer’s permissible professional risk.