An Italian court has ruled in your favour. The defendant holds assets in Poland. The question now is how to convert that ruling into actual payment – and how quickly the Polish courts will cooperate.

Enforcing an Italian judgment in Poland is governed primarily by Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 (Brussels I Recast), which applies to civil and commercial matters between EU member states. Under this framework, a judgment issued by an Italian court is enforceable in Poland without any declaration of enforceability (exequatur) in most cases. The competent court for enforcement proceedings is the district court (sąd rejonowy) at the debtor's place of residence or registered office, and the enforcement itself is carried out by a court enforcement officer (komornik sądowy).

This guide walks through the procedure step by step. It covers which instrument applies, what documents you need, how long the process takes, what it costs, and where enforcement applications typically fail. Three business scenarios – a manufacturing creditor, an IT services provider, and a foreign investor – illustrate how the rules operate in practice.

Which legal instrument governs enforcement of Italian judgments in Poland?

The starting point is identifying the correct legal framework. Brussels I Recast covers the vast majority of civil and commercial disputes between Italian and Polish parties. It applies to judgments issued on or after 10 January 2015. For judgments issued before that date, the earlier Brussels I Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 applies, and those do require a declaration of enforceability before execution can begin – a distinction that still matters for older trade disputes.

Under Brussels I Recast, an Italian judgment in a civil or commercial matter is directly enforceable in Poland. The creditor does not need Polish court approval to commence enforcement. This is the core advantage of the EU framework. The creditor obtains a certified copy of the Italian judgment and a standard certificate from the Italian court (Form I under the Regulation), then proceeds straight to the Polish enforcement officer.

Two alternative instruments are worth knowing. The European Enforcement Order (EEO) applies to uncontested claims certified in Italy. The European Order for Payment (EOP), issued under Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006, provides a streamlined cross-border procedure for undisputed monetary claims. Both are enforceable in Poland without exequatur. The National Court Register (Krajowy Rejestr Sądowy, KRS) is the reference point for verifying the debtor's registered details before filing.

  • Brussels I Recast – civil and commercial judgments issued from 10 January 2015
  • Brussels I (old) – judgments before that date; exequatur required
  • European Enforcement Order – uncontested claims only
  • European Order for Payment – undisputed monetary claims
  • 1958 New York Convention – arbitral awards from Italy

Arbitration Poland practitioners should note that Italian arbitral awards fall outside Brussels I entirely. Recognition of an Italian award follows the New York Convention, which requires a separate recognition application to a Polish appellate court (sąd apelacyjny). That process typically takes three to six months and involves a different document set than the Brussels I track.

What documents does a creditor need to file in Poland?

Document preparation is where enforcement applications most often stall. A missing certificate or an untranslated page can delay proceedings by several months. The core package for a Brussels I Recast enforcement application has four components: the judgment itself, the Form I certificate, a certified Polish translation of both, and proof of service of the judgment on the debtor in Italy.

The Form I certificate is issued by the Italian court that delivered the judgment. It is a standardised form in Italian and must be accompanied by a certified translation into Polish. The Polish court enforcement officer (komornik) will not proceed without it. Translation must be carried out by a sworn translator (tłumacz przysięgły) registered in Poland. Allow three to four weeks for certified translation of a complex judgment – longer if the Italian original runs to many pages.

We secured enforcement of an Italian commercial judgment exceeding EUR 800,000 for a manufacturing client in the Mazowieckie region (autumn 2025). The key issue was a defective service certificate from the Italian proceedings. We obtained a supplementary attestation from the Italian court, which resolved the objection within six weeks and allowed enforcement to proceed without interruption.

For EOP and EEO matters, the document set is lighter. The creditor files the certified EOP or EEO instrument directly with the komornik, along with a Polish translation. No court application is needed in Poland. This makes the EOP track approximately two months faster than the standard Brussels I route when the claim was uncontested in Italy.

  • Certified copy of the Italian judgment (apostille not required within the EU)
  • Form I certificate issued by the Italian court
  • Sworn Polish translation of both documents
  • Proof of service on the debtor in Italian proceedings
  • Power of attorney for Polish counsel (notarised if issued outside Poland)

A practical note on costs at this stage: sworn translation of a 20-page judgment costs between PLN 1,500 and PLN 4,000 depending on complexity. Budget this into your enforcement timeline from the outset.

To receive an expert assessment of your Italian judgment enforcement file, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.

How does the enforcement procedure unfold before Polish courts and officers?

Once the document package is complete, enforcement moves through two operational stages: filing with the komornik and, if the debtor challenges enforcement, litigation before the district court. Under Brussels I Recast, the creditor files directly with a komornik at the debtor's location. The komornik then issues an enforcement notice to the debtor, giving 14 days to satisfy the claim voluntarily before coercive measures begin.

Coercive measures available to the komornik include bank account seizure, wage garnishment, seizure of movable and immovable property, and – for corporate debtors – seizure of receivables. Bank account seizure is typically the fastest route. The komornik contacts the debtor's bank electronically through the OGNIVO system; funds can be frozen within 48 hours of the enforcement order being issued.

The debtor may oppose enforcement by filing an application to refuse enforcement (wniosek o odmowę wykonania) with the district court. Under Brussels I Recast, the grounds for refusal are narrow. They include manifest breach of Polish public policy (ordre public), violation of the debtor's right to be heard in Italian proceedings, and irreconcilable conflict with an earlier Polish judgment. Notably, the Polish court cannot review the merits of the Italian judgment. A dispute lawyer handling the refusal application should expect a hearing within two to three months of filing.

Our team obtained interim asset protection measures for an Italian technology company's Polish subsidiary in the Silesia region (summer 2025), preserving receivables worth over EUR 1.2m pending the outcome of a refusal application filed by the Polish debtor. The application was ultimately dismissed, and enforcement proceeded in full.

The total timeline from filing with the komornik to receipt of funds – assuming no challenge – is typically three to five months. A contested refusal application adds four to eight months. Complex cases involving real estate enforcement can extend to twelve months or more.

What are the costs and common mistakes in Italian judgment enforcement?

Enforcement in Poland involves several cost layers. The komornik's fee is set by statute at 10% of the amount recovered, subject to a minimum of PLN 200 and a maximum of PLN 50,000 per enforcement action. This fee is borne by the debtor as a rule, but the creditor must advance it. Translation and certification costs run PLN 2,000 to PLN 6,000 for a typical commercial judgment. Legal representation before the komornik and Polish courts adds professional fees that vary by firm and complexity.

Three mistakes recur in Italian judgment enforcement files. First, creditors underestimate translation requirements. Every document in the package – including annexes and procedural certificates – must be translated. A partial translation is grounds for the komornik to refuse to act. Second, creditors file against the wrong entity. Italian corporate groups often have Polish subsidiaries registered under different names. Verifying the exact debtor entity in the KRS before filing prevents wasted enforcement steps.

Third – and most damaging – creditors delay filing. Under Polish enforcement law, a judgment becomes time-barred for enforcement purposes after ten years from the date it became final. However, Italian law may impose shorter limitation periods on the underlying claim. More practically, delay gives the debtor time to restructure assets. A debtor who learns that enforcement is coming may transfer property within weeks. Personal liability of directors for fraudulent asset transfers does exist under Polish law, but pursuing it adds months to the recovery process.

Sanctions compliance is a separate but related risk. Where the Italian judgment creditor is an entity subject to international sanctions regimes, or where the debtor appears on a sanctions list, the enforcement officer may be required to pause proceedings. For guidance on how sanctions screening obligations interact with enforcement, see our article on sanctions screening obligations for Polish companies.

How do three business scenarios illustrate the enforcement process?

The rules operate differently depending on the creditor's situation. Three scenarios show where the process moves quickly and where it slows.

Scenario 1 – Manufacturing supplier. An Italian manufacturer obtained a judgment for EUR 320,000 against a Polish distributor that had stopped paying invoices. The judgment was issued under Brussels I Recast. The Italian court issued Form I within three weeks. The creditor's Polish counsel filed directly with a komornik in Poznań. Bank account seizure recovered EUR 180,000 within six weeks. The remainder required seizure of trade receivables, which took a further three months. Total recovery time: approximately four months. No refusal application was filed by the debtor.

Scenario 2 – IT services provider. An Italian software company held an EOP for EUR 95,000 against a Warsaw-based client. The EOP track bypassed the court stage entirely. The komornik received the EOP certificate and translation, issued an enforcement notice, and the debtor paid voluntarily within 14 days to avoid asset seizure. Total elapsed time from filing to payment: under three weeks. The EOP route is consistently the fastest for undisputed claims below EUR 100,000. For tax structuring questions related to Italian operations in Poland, see our Italy tax practice page.

Scenario 3 – Foreign investor with real estate exposure. A German-owned entity with Italian judgment creditors sought enforcement against a Polish company holding commercial real estate in Lower Silesia. The debtor filed a refusal application citing ordre public. The application was dismissed after five months. Real estate enforcement then proceeded through a court-supervised auction process, which added a further eight months. Total timeline: thirteen months from initial filing. This scenario underlines why early asset-tracing work – before filing – is worth the investment. For comparison with enforcement of judgments from other jurisdictions, see our guide on enforcing a UAE judgment in Poland.

A KIO appeal analogy is sometimes raised by clients familiar with Polish public procurement – the speed and formality of KIO proceedings contrast sharply with the longer civil enforcement track. Civil enforcement has no equivalent fast-track, which is why interim measures filed in parallel with enforcement can be valuable in high-value cases.

Frequently asked questions

Q: Does an Italian judgment need to be "recognised" by a Polish court before enforcement can begin?

A: Under Brussels I Recast, no separate recognition or exequatur step is required for judgments issued from 10 January 2015 onward. The creditor files directly with the court enforcement officer. For judgments issued before that date under the old Brussels I Regulation, a declaration of enforceability must be obtained from a Polish district court before enforcement can proceed – a process that typically takes two to four months.

Q: How long does enforcement typically take, and what does it cost?

A: An uncontested enforcement under Brussels I Recast typically takes three to five months from filing to receipt of funds. A contested case adds four to eight months. The enforcement officer's statutory fee is 10% of the recovered amount, capped at PLN 50,000 per action. Translation and legal costs for a standard commercial judgment add PLN 5,000 to PLN 15,000 depending on complexity and the number of enforcement actions required.

Q: Can the Polish court review the merits of the Italian judgment?

A: No. This is a common misconception. The Polish court considering a refusal application under Brussels I Recast cannot reopen the substance of the Italian dispute. It may only examine the narrow grounds specified in the Regulation – primarily public policy, procedural fairness in Italian proceedings, and conflict with an existing Polish judgment. Attempting to relitigate the merits in Polish proceedings will fail and will delay enforcement.

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 cross-border judgment enforcement, commercial litigation, and arbitration. 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.