A German technology company wins a EUR 4.2m ICC arbitration award against its Polish distributor. The tribunal has spoken. But the award sits on a desk in Paris – unenforceable until a Polish court grants recognition and an execution clause. The distributor's assets are in Warsaw and Wrocław. Time matters. Every week of delay is a week the debtor can restructure, transfer assets, or simply wait.

Enforcing an arbitral award in Poland requires a two-stage court procedure: first, recognition or declaration of enforceability before a district court (sąd okręgowy); second, execution conducted by a court bailiff (komornik sądowy) under a writ of execution. For foreign awards, Polish courts apply the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958), to which Poland has been a party since 1961. The process typically takes between three and nine months from filing to active enforcement, depending on the complexity of the case and the debtor's conduct.

This guide walks through each stage of the procedure – from preparing the application to managing enforcement against evasive debtors. It covers the three most common business scenarios, flags the mistakes that cost creditors months of delay, and answers the questions our clients ask most often. Whether the award was issued in London, Stockholm, Vienna, or Warsaw, the Polish enforcement framework applies the same analytical lens.

What documents are required to start the recognition procedure?

The first stage is purely documentary. Getting it right before filing saves weeks. Polish courts applying the New York Convention require the original award (or a certified copy) and the original arbitration agreement (or a certified copy). Both must be accompanied by sworn translations into Polish, prepared by a sworn translator (tłumacz przysięgły) certified in Poland. A single missing translation is sufficient grounds for the court to return the application without examination on the merits.

The application itself is filed with the sąd okręgowy (district court) with jurisdiction over the place where enforcement is sought – typically where the debtor's registered office or assets are located. The National Court Register (Krajowy Rejestr Sądowy, KRS) is the starting point for confirming the debtor's registered address. The court fee for recognition of a foreign award is a flat PLN 300. For a domestic award issued by a Polish arbitral tribunal, the fee structure is the same, but sworn translations are not required.

The application must contain:

  • Identification of the parties (names, addresses, KRS or PESEL numbers where available)
  • The original award or certified copy with sworn Polish translation
  • The arbitration agreement or certified copy with sworn Polish translation
  • A statement that the award is final and binding under the law of the seat
  • A power of attorney if the application is filed by a representative

One practical point deserves emphasis. If the award was issued in a jurisdiction that is not a party to the New York Convention, Polish courts apply the bilateral treaty framework or, failing that, the general provisions of Polish civil procedure law. The procedural path is longer – expect an additional two to three months. For awards from New York Convention states, the presumption of enforceability runs in the creditor's favour from the outset.

We secured recognition of a Stockholm Chamber of Commerce award worth over EUR 3.2m for an IT sector client with assets in the Mazowieckie region (summer 2025). Correct documentation on day one meant the court issued its recognition order within 47 days of filing.

How does the Polish court examine an application for enforcement?

Polish courts do not re-examine the merits of the dispute. The examination is limited to the grounds for refusal listed exhaustively under the New York Convention and mirrored in Polish civil procedure law. Those grounds fall into two categories: grounds the debtor must raise (incapacity, lack of notice, excess of jurisdiction, award not yet binding) and grounds the court raises of its own motion (non-arbitrability, public policy). The public policy exception is interpreted narrowly by Polish courts – a result that is merely unfavourable to the debtor does not engage it.

The court proceeds on a written basis in most cases. The debtor is served with the application and given a deadline – typically 14 days – to file observations. If the debtor raises a refusal ground, the court may schedule a hearing. In straightforward cases where no objection is filed, the court issues its order without a hearing. This written-only path is the fastest route to an enforcement title.

The Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court of Poland) has consistently held that the public policy exception cannot be used to relitigate factual findings made by the arbitral tribunal. This is a meaningful protection for creditors. It means that a debtor who lost on the facts cannot reopen those facts in Warsaw simply by invoking public policy. The exception is reserved for genuine conflicts with fundamental principles – constitutional rights, mandatory consumer protections, or clear violations of procedural fairness.

Once the recognition order becomes final (after the 7-day appeal window closes, or after any appeal is resolved), the court appends the execution clause (klauzula wykonalności). The document with the execution clause is the writ of execution (tytuł wykonawczy). This is the instrument handed to the bailiff. The total elapsed time from filing to writ – assuming no objection – is typically 6 to 10 weeks.

For companies with cross-border exposure, understanding how Polish enforcement interacts with other jurisdictions is valuable. Our guide on dispute resolution for UK companies doing business in Poland covers the post-Brexit framework and the practical implications for English-law contracts.

What enforcement tools are available once the writ is issued?

The writ of execution opens the full toolkit of Polish civil enforcement. The creditor instructs a bailiff (komornik sądowy) by filing an enforcement application together with the writ. The bailiff operates within a district but can request enforcement assistance from bailiffs in other districts. Bailiff fees are regulated – the standard fee is 10% of the amount recovered, capped at PLN 50,000 per enforcement proceeding. There is also a fixed advance fee of PLN 300 payable on filing.

The main enforcement instruments available are:

  • Attachment of bank accounts – the fastest and most effective tool for liquid debtors
  • Attachment of receivables owed to the debtor by third parties
  • Seizure and sale of movable assets
  • Enforcement against real property (mortgage enforcement takes 12 to 24 months)
  • Attachment of shares in Polish companies registered in the KRS

Bank account attachment works through the Centralny System Informatyczny Komornika (Central Bailiff IT System), which connects bailiffs electronically to Polish banks. A single instruction from the bailiff triggers simultaneous queries to all major banks. If the debtor holds accounts, funds are frozen within 24 to 48 hours of the query. This speed is the reason creditors should instruct the bailiff immediately after receiving the writ – not after giving the debtor a courtesy notice.

Asset tracing is a separate exercise that runs in parallel. The bailiff has access to the KRS, the land register (Księga Wieczysta), and the vehicle register (CEPiK). For debtors who have dispersed assets or transferred property in anticipation of enforcement, the actio Pauliana (creditor's avoidance action) under Polish civil law provides a mechanism to challenge pre-enforcement transfers. The limitation period for that action is five years from the date of the harmful transaction.

What are the three most common business scenarios?

The procedure looks the same on paper. In practice, the debtor's profile determines the strategy. Three scenarios recur in our practice – each requiring a different sequencing of steps.

Scenario 1 – Manufacturing company with fixed assets. A Polish manufacturer holds real property, machinery, and trade receivables. The creditor has time but wants certainty. The recommended path: file for recognition immediately, simultaneously apply for interim measures (zabezpieczenie) to freeze the debtor's real property before the recognition order is issued. Interim measures can be granted ex parte within 3 to 7 days. They prevent asset transfers during the recognition phase. Real property enforcement is slow – 12 to 24 months – but the asset does not disappear. This scenario suits creditors who hold a large award and can absorb a longer timeline in exchange for full recovery.

Scenario 2 – IT services company with receivables and bank accounts. A Warsaw-based software house has no real property but holds significant receivables from clients and cash in bank accounts. The correct move is to obtain the writ as quickly as possible and instruct the bailiff on day one. Bank account attachment and receivables attachment together can recover the full award amount within 30 to 90 days of the writ being issued. Interim measures are less critical here – speed is the priority. We obtained recovery of over PLN 1.8m for a technology sector creditor in the Małopolska region (winter 2025) using this approach.

Scenario 3 – Foreign investor enforcing against a Polish subsidiary of an international group. The subsidiary has limited Polish assets but is owed intercompany receivables by its parent. The creditor should attach those intercompany receivables as part of the enforcement. Additionally, if the parent is domiciled in an EU member state, the European Account Preservation Order (EAPO) regulation provides a parallel tool to freeze bank accounts across borders without prior notice to the debtor. This cross-border dimension requires coordination between Polish and foreign counsel. For background on structuring cross-border recovery, see our analysis of enforcing a Ukraine judgment in Poland, which covers analogous asset-tracing challenges.

What mistakes cost creditors months of delay?

Most enforcement failures are procedural, not substantive. The award is valid. The debtor has assets. But a correctable error at the documentation stage costs three to four months. The most frequent mistakes follow a recognisable pattern.

The first is filing a translation prepared by a translator not certified in Poland. The New York Convention requires a certified translation, and Polish courts interpret this as requiring a Polish sworn translator. A translation certified in Germany or France does not satisfy this requirement. The court returns the application. The creditor must commission a new translation – typically a four to six week delay.

The second is failing to apply for interim measures before or at the time of filing. A debtor who learns that recognition proceedings have started has an incentive to move assets. Polish interim measure law allows the creditor to apply for a freeze at the moment of filing – even before the debtor is notified. Waiting until the recognition order is granted forfeits this window. In cases where the debtor is sophisticated, that forfeiture is irreversible.

The third is choosing the wrong court. Filing in the court at the creditor's registered office rather than the court at the debtor's registered office or the location of the assets is a jurisdictional error. The court will decline jurisdiction and transfer the case – adding four to eight weeks.

What to prepare before filing:

  • Certified copy of the award apostilled or legalised as required
  • Sworn Polish translations of the award and arbitration agreement
  • KRS extract for the debtor (no older than three months)
  • Asset search results (land register, vehicle register, KRS shareholdings)
  • Draft interim measure application ready to file simultaneously

A note on sanctions compliance: where the debtor or its beneficial owners appear on EU, US, or UK sanctions lists, enforcement proceeds differently. Payments received under enforcement may constitute a "funds transfer" requiring a licence from the relevant authority. This is not a reason to abandon enforcement – but it is a reason to obtain a sanctions compliance opinion before instructing the bailiff. Our work in this area intersects with the broader question of asset structuring in Poland, particularly where award debtors hold assets through family foundations or similar vehicles.

Specific situations require a tailored approach. If your company holds an arbitral award and is assessing recovery options, the window for interim measures closes once the debtor is notified of proceedings. To receive an expert assessment of your enforcement position, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.

For creditors holding awards in the EUR 500,000 to EUR 5m range against Polish-registered debtors, our team conducts an initial asset mapping exercise, prepares the recognition application and interim measure filing simultaneously, and instructs the bailiff on the day the writ is issued. Email info@kordeckipartners.com to begin.

Frequently asked questions

Q: How long does the full enforcement process take from award to recovery?

A: For a foreign New York Convention award with correct documentation and no debtor opposition, recognition typically takes 6 to 10 weeks. If the debtor files objections, add 2 to 4 months. Active enforcement against bank accounts and receivables can achieve recovery within 30 to 90 days of the writ being issued. End-to-end, a straightforward case resolves in 3 to 6 months. Real property enforcement extends the timeline to 18 to 30 months from filing.

Q: Is it a misconception that Polish courts routinely refuse foreign awards on public policy grounds?

A: Yes. This is one of the most persistent misconceptions in cross-border enforcement. Polish courts apply the public policy exception narrowly and in line with the international standard. Refusals on public policy grounds are rare and are typically limited to awards that violate constitutional rights or fundamental procedural guarantees. A debtor who simply disagrees with the tribunal's findings cannot successfully invoke public policy to block enforcement.

Q: What does the recognition procedure cost?

A: The court fee for recognition of a foreign arbitral award is a flat PLN 300. Sworn translations cost between PLN 80 and PLN 150 per page, depending on the language and complexity. For a 30-page award, translation costs typically range from PLN 2,400 to PLN 4,500. Legal fees depend on the size and complexity of the matter. Bailiff fees on enforcement are 10% of the amount recovered, capped at PLN 50,000. These costs are generally recoverable from the debtor once enforcement 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 dispute resolution, arbitral award enforcement, and cross-border asset recovery. 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.