A Mazowieckie-based technology company received a contractual claim exceeding PLN 3m from a former distribution partner in early spring 2025. The claimant filed directly with the Commercial Division of the Regional Court in Warsaw, seeking full payment plus statutory interest. The defendant – our client – had no prior experience with Polish commercial proceedings and needed a clear picture of what lay ahead.

Commercial litigation in Polish courts follows a structured, multi-stage process governed by the Kodeks postępowania cywilnego (Code of Civil Procedure, KPC). Cases filed in the Commercial Division of a Regional Court typically resolve at first instance within 12 to 24 months, depending on complexity and the volume of evidence. A losing party retains the right to appeal to the Court of Appeal within two weeks of receiving the written judgment.

This case study traces the matter from the initial claim to final resolution. It covers the structural features of Polish commercial proceedings, the strategic choices made along the way, and the lessons that apply to any business facing a similar dispute in Poland. Readers managing litigation Warsaw-side or advising on arbitration Poland alternatives will find the procedural map directly useful.

What does the structure of Polish commercial proceedings look like?

Polish commercial litigation is a specialist branch. Regional Courts (Sądy Okręgowe) handle commercial disputes where the value in dispute exceeds PLN 75,000. Below that threshold, District Courts (Sądy Rejonowe) apply. The National Court Register (Krajowy Rejestr Sądowy, KRS) is the reference point for verifying a counterparty's legal standing before proceedings begin – a step many foreign clients overlook.

The Commercial Division operates under rules that differ materially from general civil procedure. Parties bear a strict burden to present all evidence in their opening submissions. Evidence withheld at the statement-of-claim stage may be excluded later. This front-loading requirement forces early strategic decisions about which documents to deploy and in what order.

In our client's case, the claimant's statement of claim ran to over 200 pages of exhibits. We had 14 days from service to file a response. That response had to address every factual allegation and introduce all counter-evidence the defendant intended to rely on. Missing that window would have precluded several defences entirely – an irreversible consequence that focused minds quickly.

The court set a preparatory hearing within six weeks of the response. At that hearing, the presiding judge outlined the disputed issues, fixed a timetable for witness evidence, and signalled which expert opinions would be ordered. The court-appointed expert's fee – typically between PLN 5,000 and PLN 20,000 per report – is paid in advance by the party requesting the opinion.

How did the litigation strategy address the core risks?

Three risk factors shaped the strategy from day one. First, the contractual documentation was ambiguous on the question of exclusivity. Second, the claimant had already obtained a payment order (nakaz zapłaty) in proceedings on the papers, before our engagement. Third, the defendant's internal communications contained language that could be read as an admission of partial liability.

We secured a reversal of an adverse interim payment order for a technology client in the Mazowieckie region (spring 2025). The reversal was obtained by filing a formal objection within the mandatory two-week window. Filing even one day late would have rendered the order final and enforceable – a point that illustrates how unforgiving Polish procedural deadlines are for the unprepared.

On the substantive side, the exclusivity question turned on the interpretation of a distribution agreement governed by Polish law. Under Polish corporate legislation, contractual terms are construed against the background of trade custom and the parties' prior course of dealing. We assembled three years of correspondence showing a consistent pattern that contradicted the claimant's reading.

The internal communications risk required a different approach. Rather than suppressing those documents – which would have been improper and counterproductive – we contextualised them with a timeline showing that the statements were made during settlement negotiations and therefore carried limited evidential weight under the KPC's rules on without-prejudice communications. The court accepted that framing at the evidentiary hearing.

For any business managing sanctions compliance obligations alongside active litigation, it is worth flagging that the opposing party's beneficial ownership structure should be checked against EU and Polish sanctions lists before the first hearing. Proceeding against a sanctioned entity without the required licence from the Polish Financial Supervision Authority (Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego, KNF) creates separate regulatory exposure.

What were the process milestones and the final outcome?

The procedural timeline unfolded in four stages. Understanding each stage – and its associated deadline – is the transferable lesson for any dispute lawyer advising clients on Polish proceedings.

  • Stage 1 – Statement of claim served: defendant has 14 days to file a response or risk a default judgment.
  • Stage 2 – Preparatory hearing: typically within six weeks of the response; timetable fixed here.
  • Stage 3 – Evidentiary hearings: witness and expert evidence heard over two to four sessions, usually spanning three to nine months.
  • Stage 4 – Judgment and appeal: first-instance judgment delivered within 30 days of closing arguments; appeal filed within two weeks of receiving the written reasons.

In this matter, the evidentiary phase ran from June to October 2025. The court-appointed expert delivered a written opinion on market practice in the distribution sector in August 2025, broadly supporting the defendant's position. Closing written submissions were exchanged in November 2025.

The Regional Court in Warsaw issued judgment in December 2025, dismissing the PLN 3m claim in its entirety and awarding costs against the claimant. The claimant did not appeal within the two-week window. The matter closed without any payment by our client – and without the need to pursue a KIO appeal or parallel arbitration Poland track that had been considered as a contingency at the outset.

One structural observation: Polish commercial courts are increasingly willing to use electronic hearings for procedural sessions. This reduced travel costs for our client's witnesses, who were based outside Warsaw. Foreign investors should factor this flexibility into their litigation budgets from the start.

What lessons transfer to other commercial disputes in Poland?

The most important lesson is procedural: Polish litigation is front-loaded. Every document, every witness, every argument must be identified before the preparatory hearing. The court will not wait for a party that is still gathering evidence six months in. Businesses that treat the first response deadline as a formality routinely forfeit defences that would have succeeded on the merits.

We obtained a full costs award for a manufacturing client in Lower Silesia (autumn 2025) in a separate supply-chain dispute, precisely because the opponent failed to introduce a key expert report at the correct stage. The report arrived late. The court excluded it. The claim failed as a result.

The second lesson concerns expert evidence. Polish courts rely heavily on court-appointed experts rather than party-instructed witnesses. Parties can submit written questions to the court-appointed expert and challenge the report at a hearing, but they cannot simply substitute their own expert's opinion. Understanding this constraint shapes how technical arguments should be framed in the pleadings.

A practical checklist for any business entering Polish commercial litigation:

  • Verify the counterparty's KRS entry and beneficial ownership before filing or responding.
  • Assemble all documentary evidence before the response deadline – 14 days moves fast.
  • Budget for court-appointed expert fees of PLN 5,000 to PLN 20,000 per report.
  • Check sanctions compliance obligations if the opposing party has cross-border ownership.
  • Consider whether the dispute lawyer handling the matter has experience in the specific Commercial Division – practice varies between Warsaw, Kraków, and regional courts.

For foreign investors, one additional point deserves emphasis. A judgment obtained in Poland can be enforced across the EU under the Brussels Ia Regulation without a separate exequatur procedure. Understanding the enforcement pathway at the outset – including the option to enforce a foreign judgment in Poland in the reverse direction – shapes whether litigation or arbitration is the better-value choice for a given dispute.

Finally, tax exposure can intersect with commercial disputes in unexpected ways. A damages award received by a Polish subsidiary may carry CIT consequences. Clients managing Pillar Two obligations for Polish subsidiaries should factor litigation outcomes into their effective tax rate calculations before the judgment becomes final.

For a tailored strategy on commercial litigation in Polish courts, reach out to info@kordeckipartners.com. Our disputes practice in Poland covers the full procedural cycle from pre-action strategy through to enforcement.

Frequently asked questions

Q: How long does commercial litigation in a Polish Regional Court typically take?

A: A first-instance judgment in the Commercial Division of a Regional Court typically takes 12 to 24 months from the date the claim is filed. The timeline depends on the complexity of the evidence, the number of witnesses, and whether a court-appointed expert is required. Appeals to the Court of Appeal add a further six to eighteen months.

Q: Can a foreign company enforce a Polish court judgment abroad?

A: Within the European Union, a Polish judgment is enforceable in other member states under the Brussels Ia Regulation without a separate recognition procedure. Outside the EU, enforcement depends on bilateral treaties or the domestic law of the country where assets are located. It is a common misconception that winning in a Polish court automatically resolves the enforcement question globally.

Q: What is the cost of filing a commercial claim in Poland?

A: Court filing fees in commercial proceedings are calculated as a percentage of the claim value, subject to a cap of PLN 200,000. For a PLN 3m claim, the filing fee would be PLN 15,000. This fee is payable by the claimant at the time of filing and is recoverable from the losing party if the claim succeeds.

KORDECKI & Partners is a law firm based in Warsaw and Krakow, advising business clients across 30 jurisdictions. Our team combines expertise in Polish and international law with a practical approach to commercial litigation, arbitration, and dispute resolution. We work with Polish entrepreneurs, foreign investors, and in-house legal teams. To discuss your situation, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.

Disclaimer: This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. KORDECKI & Partners assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@kordeckipartners.com.