A logistics company based in the Mazowieckie region had secured land, finalised its architectural concept, and set a hard opening date for its new distribution centre. Then the 2025 amendments to Polish construction law arrived. Deadlines shifted. Digital submission portals replaced paper files. The company's original permit timeline collapsed overnight.

Poland's construction permitting regime was substantially revised in 2025, introducing mandatory electronic filings through the e-budownictwo portal, revised objection windows, and tighter coordination requirements between the District Architectural and Construction Inspectorate (PINB) and regional planning authorities. Investors who had structured their project timelines around pre-2025 practice faced gaps of several months. Understanding the new sequence – and where it breaks down – is essential for any developer or foreign investor entering the Polish market.

This case study traces how one logistics client recovered its permit timeline, what procedural traps were identified along the way, and what transferable lessons apply to any construction project in Poland in 2025 and beyond. The matter involved a warehouse complex exceeding 10,000 square metres in the Mazowieckie region.

What was the background to the permit delay?

The client had submitted its building permit application under the previous paper-based regime in late 2024. That application was pending when the 2025 amendments took effect. Under Polish construction legislation, transitional provisions required pending applications to be re-submitted through the e-budownictwo electronic platform if they had not yet been accepted as formally complete. The client's application fell into that gap.

The District Architectural and Construction Inspectorate returned the file, citing formal deficiencies under the revised checklist. Three documents – the geotechnical opinion, the fire safety coordination statement, and the updated site development conditions – no longer matched the new form requirements. Each had to be reissued. That process alone consumed six weeks.

A parallel problem emerged with the local spatial development plan (miejscowy plan zagospodarowania przestrzennego, MPZP). The municipality had adopted a plan amendment in January 2025. The amendment reclassified a strip of the client's plot from industrial to mixed-use. The client had not been notified individually – Polish planning law does not require individual notification of landowners in all MPZP amendment procedures. The reclassification affected roughly 12 percent of the plot's buildable area.

These two issues – the transitional re-submission requirement and the silent MPZP amendment – are precisely the kind of compounding risk that turns a four-month permit process into a nine-month one. Identifying both early was the starting point of the recovery strategy. (For investors also managing lease obligations on adjacent properties during construction delays, the issues we outline in our office lease review for Germany-based tenants are directly relevant to managing concurrent contractual exposure.)

How did the legal strategy address the 2025 procedural changes?

The core strategy had three elements: accelerated re-submission, a parallel planning challenge, and contractual risk containment. Each ran on a separate track but with coordinated milestones. The target was to recover at least three months of the lost timeline before the construction season closed in autumn 2025.

On the re-submission track, the team prepared a complete e-budownictwo package within ten working days. This required coordinating four specialists simultaneously – the lead architect, the geotechnical engineer, the fire safety coordinator, and the structural designer. The revised platform has a strict sequential validation logic: if any attachment fails format validation, the entire submission is rejected. We ran a dry-run submission against a test environment before the live filing, which identified two XML metadata errors that would otherwise have caused an automatic rejection.

We secured a formal confirmation of complete submission within 14 days of the live filing. That confirmation is significant: under current Polish construction legislation, the 65-day statutory decision period begins only from the date of formal completeness, not from the date of initial filing. Missing that distinction costs developers weeks.

On the planning track, we filed a request for interpretation of the MPZP amendment with the local authority within 30 days of identifying the reclassification. The authority confirmed that the affected strip could still accommodate ancillary infrastructure – access roads and green buffer zones – even under the mixed-use classification. That interpretation, obtained in writing, allowed the architect to revise the site plan without reducing the warehouse footprint. We obtained this written confirmation in summer 2025, keeping the structural design intact.

  • Verify the MPZP status of every plot within 30 days of any plan adoption cycle in the relevant municipality
  • Run a pre-submission format check on all e-budownictwo attachments before live filing
  • Confirm the date of formal completeness in writing – this starts the 65-day clock
  • Coordinate geotechnical, fire safety, and structural documents simultaneously, not sequentially
  • Obtain written authority interpretations of any ambiguous zoning classification

The contractual risk containment element addressed the client's general contractor agreement. The original contract contained a force majeure clause that was silent on regulatory changes. We negotiated a supplementary protocol within 21 days, extending the contractor's mobilisation deadline by 90 days without penalty and preserving the client's right to claim delay costs from the contractor if the permit was ultimately delayed beyond the revised schedule for reasons within the contractor's scope.

What does the process reveal about FIDIC disputes and permit-linked risks?

Construction contracts in Poland – particularly on larger commercial projects – are frequently structured around FIDIC standard forms. The 2025 permit changes have introduced a new category of Engineer's determination disputes: who bears the cost of permit re-submission delays when the cause is a regulatory change that post-dates contract execution?

In this matter, the general contractor initially argued that the re-submission requirement constituted a change in law entitling it to an extension of time and additional cost recovery under the FIDIC Red Book framework. That argument had some legal basis. However, it also depended on the precise wording of the change-in-law clause and the date on which the parties could reasonably have been expected to anticipate the 2025 amendments – since the legislative process was public from mid-2024 onwards.

We advised the client that the contractor's claim was partially sustainable for costs incurred after the formal effective date of the amendments, but not for costs attributable to the contractor's own failure to monitor the legislative calendar. That distinction – between foreseeable regulatory change and genuinely unexpected change – is where most FIDIC disputes on this issue will be fought in 2025 and 2026. (Investors structuring their Polish market entry, including those with construction components, should also consider the tax structuring implications we address in our guide on tax structuring for investors entering Poland.)

We secured a partial settlement with the contractor in autumn 2025, limiting the client's additional cost exposure to approximately PLN 180,000 – significantly below the contractor's initial claim of PLN 640,000. The settlement was reached without formal FIDIC adjudication proceedings, preserving the working relationship and the project timeline. Our team obtained this outcome for the logistics client in the Mazowieckie region (autumn 2025).

A second micro-case is instructive. We advised a retail development client in Lower Silesia (spring 2025) where a similar e-budownictwo format rejection had occurred. There, the rejection was caused by an outdated digital signature certificate on the architect's power of attorney. The fix took 48 hours once identified – but the client had already lost three weeks waiting for the inspectorate to issue a formal deficiency notice rather than proactively checking submission status. The lesson: active monitoring of the e-budownictwo portal queue is now a project management task, not a passive waiting exercise.

What are the transferable lessons for foreign investors?

Foreign investors entering the Polish market – particularly those from jurisdictions with centralised permitting systems – consistently underestimate the layered nature of Polish construction approvals. The permit itself is only one decision. It sits on top of zoning compliance, environmental screening, utility connection agreements, and heritage protection clearances, each with its own authority and timeline.

The 2025 changes have made the process more transparent in some respects – the e-budownictwo portal provides real-time status tracking – but less forgiving of procedural errors. An incorrectly formatted attachment that would previously have triggered a phone call from the inspectorate now triggers an automatic rejection with a formal 7-day cure period. Miss that window and the 65-day clock resets entirely.

For investors also managing commercial lease obligations during construction phases – a common situation for those fitting out leased premises before moving to owned premises – the interaction between permit timelines and lease commencement dates deserves specific contractual attention. Our analysis of office lease review points for UAE-based tenants addresses several of these interface issues in a cross-border context.

The practical checklist for any foreign investor approaching a Polish construction permit in 2025 is short but non-negotiable. Confirm MPZP status before signing the land purchase agreement. Engage a local architect familiar with e-budownictwo validation requirements. Build a 90-day buffer into any financing or lease timeline that depends on permit issuance. And treat the date of formal completeness – not the date of filing – as the true start of the statutory decision period.

Failure to observe any of these steps does not merely delay the project. It can trigger personal liability of company directors for contractor delay claims, forfeit bank financing tranches tied to permit milestones, and – in the worst case – preclude the use of already-purchased materials if design modifications become necessary after re-submission. These consequences are irreversible in the short term.

Your project's specific permit exposure depends on the interaction of site conditions, contract structure, and the 2025 procedural changes – and that combination is unique to each matter. Addressing it early closes off the scenarios that cannot be reversed once a deadline passes.

To discuss how the 2025 construction permit changes apply to your project in Poland, contact info@kordeckipartners.com. Our team will review your current permit status, identify transitional compliance gaps, and advise on contractor liability exposure.

Frequently asked questions

Q: How long does a standard construction permit take in Poland under the 2025 rules?

A: The statutory decision period is 65 days from the date the authority confirms formal completeness of the application. That confirmation date – not the filing date – starts the clock. In practice, first-time e-budownictwo submissions by applicants unfamiliar with the platform's validation requirements often require one correction cycle, adding 3 to 6 weeks. Budget a minimum of 90 days from initial filing for straightforward projects.

Q: Does the 2025 reform affect projects that had already received a permit before the amendments took effect?

A: Permits issued before the 2025 amendments took effect remain valid and do not require re-issuance. However, any material design change requiring a permit modification must now be filed through e-budownictwo under the new rules. A common misconception is that a minor design change can be handled through a simple notification – under current Polish construction legislation, the threshold for what qualifies as a "non-substantial deviation" has been narrowed, meaning more changes now require a formal modification permit.

Q: What happens if the local spatial development plan is amended after a building permit application has been filed?

A: Under Polish construction law, the relevant planning conditions are assessed as of the date the application is formally accepted as complete. A subsequent MPZP amendment does not automatically invalidate a pending application. However, if the authority has not yet confirmed formal completeness, the new plan provisions apply. This distinction – completeness confirmation before or after the plan amendment – is frequently determinative and should be checked immediately when any MPZP change is identified during the permit process.

About KORDECKI & Partners

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 real estate, construction permitting, and FIDIC 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.