The paper elaborates on the effects of Art. 354 of the Civil Obligations Act on the reduction of contractual penalty. According to this provision, the court will, at the request of the debtor, reduce the contractual penalty amount if it finds that the amount is disproportionately high, given the value and significance of the object of the obligation. The paper takes the position on the inadequacy of the value and significance of the subject of the obligation as a criterion for assessing the proportionality of the contractual penalty amount. At the same time, as a more appropriate measure, the paper points to the damage, and to other circumstances that enable the court to decide on the fairness of a contractual penalty as well. The paper also notes that the court must not neglect the creditor's interests when deciding on the reduction of the contractual penalty, and that it should permit such a reduction only when a disproportionality of the contractual penalty is evident. The paper also elaborates on certain procedural issues related to the reduction of contractual penalty.