litigation | In Principle

Judicial cooperation between the member states in cross-border civil, commercial and criminal matters is vital for integration of European markets and creation of a space of freedom, security and justice within the European Union. To streamline access to justice, member states have implemented their own IT solutions, in turn creating a need to unify these systems at the EU level. This is the aim of the EU’s Digitalisation Regulation (2023/2844).

The principle of transparency and certainty of terms are essential for ensuring fair and efficient trade, particularly within the public procurement sector. A case currently before the Court of Justice of the European Union (C-82/24), in which we have the privilege of representing the contractors, underscores the dangers of interpreting contractual terms unpredictably after a contract is awarded, and issues that can arise if governing law is applied inconsistently or arbitrarily to public contracts, disregarding the principle of party autonomy. The opinion issued in the case by Advocate General Sánchez-Bordona explains how EU law can safeguard contractors by preventing such risks.

In the judgment of 24 July 2024 (case no. II CSKP 968/22), the Supreme Court of Poland ruled on doubts regarding legal standing to assert a demand for either contract modification or payment under Art. 3571 of the Civil Code in the event of an extraordinary change of circumstances (the rebus sic stantibus clause), on the part of a consortium of entities executing a public contract for a contracting authority. The court also commented on whether a claim under Art. 3571 can be made after the contract has been fully performed. This ruling is very important for contractual practice in Poland.

Since the landmark Court of Justice ruling in 2009 in C-402/07, Sturgeon, it has generally been accepted that when it comes to the right to compensation from an air carrier under the Air Passengers Rights Regulation, a flight delay of more than three hours puts the passenger in the same position as if the flight were cancelled. But in 2024, the Court of Justice held in C-474/22, Laudamotion GmbH v flightright GmbH, that the case is not so clear-cut, and there are somewhat different rights and obligations associated with flight delay than with flight cancellation.

For years, the rules limiting the extension of a claim on appeal have been a challenge for counsel determining their litigation strategy when seeking damages in tort cases. Over many years of court proceedings, the value of the claims may change as prices rise. But the Polish courts require the amount of the claims to be frozen as of the time of entering the judgment in the first instance, even though there is a long way before the end of the court dispute.

The Polish parliament has reduced the fees on some requests for a statement of the grounds for rulings in civil proceedings. In these cases, the fee has dropped from PLN 100 to PLN 30. This fee will continue to be credited against the fee payable on the appeal.

New rules for payment of court fees on requests for conciliation in Polish civil proceedings have been in effect since 28 September 2023. The parliament has heavily reduced the fees to make the institution more attractive, after it ceased to interrupt the limitations period but only suspends it.

Generally, dispute resolution is entrusted to state courts, but the parties can renounce this jurisdiction in favour of arbitration. Typically, the parties elect arbitration in an arbitration clause included in their original contract, signed well before any dispute arises. In other cases, after a dispute arises, the parties may agree to seek arbitration by signing a post-dispute referral to arbitration.

On 1 July 2023, another major amendment to the Polish Civil Procedure Code enters into force. The changes involve general provisions, consideration of the merits, interim relief, enforcement, and arbitration. In this article, we will examine the amendments to Part Five of the Civil Procedure Code—the arbitration chapter.

The Polish parliament has voted to amend the Civil Procedure Code, introducing numerous changes primarily intended to speed up proceedings. On this occasion, the parliament decided to reinstate some solutions it had abandoned in recent years. Below we discuss the most important changes.

The statute of limitations for claims arising from a contract for a specific work is regulated differently from the general rules. Pursuant to Civil Code Art. 646, these claims become time-barred two years after the work is delivered, or if the work has not been delivered, two years after it was supposed to be delivered under the contract. This is a short timeframe, and requires great care to avoid forfeiting claims—especially as the way it is counted can raise practical questions, and in some cases a three-year term is used.

Cooperation between the parties is essential to implement many contracts. This is particularly so in the case of a construction contract or a contract to produce a specific work, where the purpose of the contract is achieved over the course of a fairly complex process and comprises many elements. The Polish parliament has recognised this strong dependence and has provided a far-reaching solution applicable when the necessary cooperation is lacking. Such a situation may even lead to rescission of the contract.