A Warsaw-based technology company wins a commercial dispute worth PLN 800,000 – then discovers that the court awarded only a fraction of its actual legal costs. The opposing party pays a fixed statutory rate, not the real invoice. That gap can run into tens of thousands of zlotys. Understanding how Polish cost recovery rules work – and where they can hurt you – is essential before any litigation decision.

Polish civil proceedings follow a "loser pays" principle, but the amount recoverable is capped by rates set in ministerial regulations rather than actual attorney fees. A winning party recovers court fees in full, but legal representation costs are limited to statutory tariffs that often fall well below market rates. The gap between real costs and recovered costs can be significant, particularly in high-value or complex disputes.

This alert covers three areas: how the cost-recovery framework operates, which thresholds and changes affect your exposure, and what steps to take before filing or defending a claim in Poland.

How does the Polish cost recovery framework work?

Polish civil procedure operates under the Kodeks postępowania cywilnego (Code of Civil Procedure, KPC). The court allocates costs at the end of proceedings. The losing party bears the winner's costs – but only up to statutory limits. Court fees, expert witness fees, and travel expenses are recoverable in full. Attorney fees are not.

Attorney cost recovery is governed by separate ministerial regulations that set fixed rates by claim value. For a claim of PLN 500,000, the statutory rate is PLN 10,800. For a claim of PLN 2,000,000, it rises to PLN 25,000. Real litigation costs in Warsaw routinely exceed these figures by a factor of three or more. That shortfall is borne entirely by the winning party – a result that surprises many foreign clients.

The court retains discretion to award costs above the minimum rate, up to six times the base amount. In practice, courts rarely exercise this power. Judges in the District Courts (Sądy Rejonowe) and Regional Courts (Sądy Okręgowe) tend to apply the base rate as a default. Securing an elevated award requires a specific, documented request supported by invoices and a breakdown of time spent.

One practical implication: litigation economics in Poland differ from common-law jurisdictions. A party that wins on the merits may still face a net financial loss once unrecovered costs are factored in. This matters most in disputes with claim values below PLN 300,000, where the statutory rate is PLN 5,400 – regardless of how complex the case was.

What recent changes affect cost recovery thresholds?

Ministerial regulations on attorney tariffs were updated in 2023, raising statutory rates across most claim brackets. The changes apply to proceedings commenced after the amendment's entry into force. Cases filed before that date continue under the prior schedule. Parties with ongoing litigation should verify which rate schedule governs their case – the difference can reach several thousand zlotys per instance.

Two thresholds deserve attention. First, claims below PLN 20,000 are heard by District Courts. Above that threshold, Regional Courts have jurisdiction. The choice of court affects both the applicable rate schedule and the procedural rules on cost allocation. Second, appeals to the Court of Appeal (Sąd Apelacyjny) trigger a fresh cost assessment. A party that wins at first instance but loses on appeal may face an obligation to reimburse the opponent's appellate costs – even if the original judgment was largely correct.

We secured a reversal of an adverse cost award exceeding PLN 180,000 for a manufacturing client in the Mazowieckie region (autumn 2025). The court had applied the wrong rate schedule. Identifying the applicable regulation early – before the judgment becomes final – is the only way to avoid a cost order that cannot later be challenged.

Foreign investors should also note the interaction with arbitration Poland proceedings. Arbitral tribunals are not bound by statutory tariffs. Cost recovery in arbitration is generally more flexible and can reflect actual fees incurred. For disputes above EUR 500,000, arbitration may produce a better net recovery outcome than court litigation, particularly where the counterparty is solvent and enforcement is straightforward.

What immediate steps should you take?

Three actions matter most before filing or responding to a claim in Polish courts.

  • Verify which court has jurisdiction – District or Regional – and identify the applicable rate schedule for your claim value.
  • Prepare a documented cost file from day one: invoices, time records, and a written breakdown. Courts will not award elevated rates without this evidence.
  • Assess whether arbitration or a KIO appeal (for public procurement disputes) offers better cost recovery terms for your specific dispute.

Timing is critical. A request for elevated cost recovery must be submitted before the court closes the hearing. Missing that window forfeits the right to argue for above-minimum rates – an irreversible consequence that no subsequent appeal can cure. For disputes involving foreign parties, the dispute resolution framework for Cyprus companies doing business in Poland sets out additional procedural considerations that apply to cross-border claims.

Our team obtained interim measures protecting assets worth over EUR 3m for a German investor's subsidiary in Lower Silesia (spring 2025). Securing those measures early preserved the economic value of the eventual cost award – once assets are dissipated, even a correct cost order becomes unenforceable.

If your dispute involves enforcement of a foreign judgment, cost recovery rules apply separately at the recognition stage. The procedural steps for enforcing a Slovakia judgment in Poland illustrate how recognition proceedings generate their own cost exposure – one that many creditors overlook when budgeting a cross-border recovery. Separately, parties with assets held through structured vehicles should review the family foundation framework in Poland for potential sanctions compliance implications when those assets become subject to litigation.

The core risk in Polish cost recovery is not losing the case. It is winning – and then discovering that the economic result does not justify the investment. That outcome is avoidable with early planning, correct forum selection, and a properly documented cost file.

Your specific situation requires an assessment before proceedings begin. Waiting until after a cost order issues precludes most corrective options.

To receive an expert assessment of your litigation cost exposure in Poland, contact info@kordeckipartners.com. Our disputes team will review your claim value, applicable rate schedule, and forum options – and identify where recovery gaps can be closed before they become permanent.

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 Poland proceedings, and cross-border 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.