A German technology company wins an ICC arbitration seated in Paris. The award is clear, the damages are quantified, and Polish assets are available. Yet the award sits unenforceable until a Polish court formally recognises it. That gap – between winning and collecting – is where enforcement procedure begins.
Enforcing a foreign or domestic arbitral award in Poland requires a court recognition or enforcement order from a Polish district court (sąd okręgowy). For foreign awards, the New York Convention (1958) governs the procedure; Poland acceded in 1961. The court examines a defined list of grounds for refusal – it does not re-examine the merits. Recognition proceedings typically conclude within three to six months at first instance, though contested cases run longer.
This guide walks through the full procedure step by step: which court has jurisdiction, what documents you need, how the debtor can resist, what enforcement looks like once the order is granted, and where proceedings commonly stall. Three business scenarios – manufacturing, IT, and cross-border investor – illustrate how the procedure plays out in practice.
Which court has jurisdiction and what documents are required?
Polish civil procedure assigns jurisdiction over recognition and enforcement to the district court at the debtor's domicile or registered seat. If the debtor has no domicile or seat in Poland, the court at the location of the assets has jurisdiction. The National Court Register (KRS) is the starting point for identifying a Polish company's registered address before filing.
For a foreign award, the applicant must submit: the original award (or a certified copy), the original arbitration agreement (or a certified copy), certified translations of both documents into Polish, and proof of service of the award on the losing party. The Polish court does not require apostille for New York Convention awards – authentication under the Convention suffices. Missing or defective translations are the single most common reason for procedural delays of four to eight weeks.
For domestic awards rendered by Polish arbitral tribunals – including the Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce (Sąd Arbitrażowy przy Krajowej Izbie Gospodarczej, SA KIG) – the procedure is simpler. The applicant files the award and the arbitration agreement with the competent district court. No translation is required. The court issues an enforcement clause (klauzula wykonalności) rather than a separate recognition order.
- Certified copy of the arbitral award
- Certified copy of the arbitration agreement
- Certified Polish translations of both
- Proof that the award was served on the respondent
- Court fee: PLN 300 for the recognition application
Filing the complete package from the outset avoids supplementation requests, which restart the court's processing clock. A well-prepared submission reaches the merits hearing faster – often within six to ten weeks of filing.
What grounds can a debtor use to resist enforcement?
Polish courts applying the New York Convention examine only the grounds for refusal listed in the Convention itself. The court does not re-open the substance of the dispute. Grounds fall into two categories: those the debtor must raise, and those the court may examine on its own motion.
Debtor-raised grounds include: lack of a valid arbitration agreement, breach of due process (the losing party was not notified of the proceedings or could not present its case), the award exceeds the scope of the arbitration agreement, the arbitral tribunal was not composed in accordance with the agreement, and the award has not yet become binding or has been set aside in the country of origin. The debtor bears the burden of proof on each of these points.
Courts raise two grounds independently: non-arbitrability of the subject matter under Polish law, and conflict with Polish public policy (klauzula porządku publicznego). Public policy challenges are the most frequently litigated. Polish courts have interpreted public policy narrowly since 2010, consistent with the pro-enforcement approach of the New York Convention. A challenge based solely on a disagreement with the merits will not succeed.
We secured recognition of an ICC award worth over EUR 3m for a manufacturing client in the Silesia region (autumn 2025), defeating a public policy objection that the debtor had raised on procedural grounds. The district court dismissed the objection within four months of filing.
One practical point: the debtor has two weeks from service of the application to file a response. That deadline is short. Applicants should serve documents in a way that creates a clear record – bailiff service (komornik sądowy) is preferable to postal service for contested cases.
How does the step-by-step enforcement timeline work?
Once the district court issues a recognition order or enforcement clause, the applicant has an enforceable title. The next step is enforcement proper, conducted by a court bailiff (komornik sądowy) attached to the district court in the district where the assets are located. The bailiff acts on the applicant's instruction – enforcement is not automatic.
The standard timeline from filing to first enforcement action runs as follows. Filing and service: weeks one to two. Court processing and hearing (uncontested): weeks six to ten. Contested hearing (with debtor response): weeks twelve to twenty. Appeal by either party to the court of appeal (sąd apelacyjny): adds four to eight months. Once the order is final, the bailiff can move within days.
Available enforcement instruments include: bank account attachment, seizure of movable assets, enforcement against real property (the longest route – expect twelve to eighteen months for a forced sale), and attachment of receivables owed to the debtor by third parties. Bank account attachment is the fastest and most effective tool. The bailiff contacts the debtor's bank directly; the bank is obliged to freeze and transfer funds within three business days.
Our team obtained interim protective measures securing assets worth over PLN 8m for a foreign investor's subsidiary in the Mazowieckie region (spring 2026), preventing dissipation of funds before the recognition order became final. Interim measures under Polish civil procedure can be granted ex parte in urgent cases – a feature that applicants often overlook.
Three scenarios illustrate the range. A manufacturing company enforcing a domestic SA KIG award against a Polish counterparty completes the process in three to four months. An IT company enforcing a London-seated LCIA award against a Polish software house faces translation and service requirements but, if uncontested, finishes in five to seven months. A foreign investor enforcing an investment treaty award must also address public policy scrutiny, which can extend proceedings to twelve months or more.
What are the most common mistakes that forfeit enforcement rights?
Delay is the primary risk. Polish civil procedure imposes no absolute time limit on filing a recognition application, but the practical window narrows as the debtor's assets move. Once assets leave Poland – transferred abroad, distributed to shareholders, or encumbered in favour of other creditors – recovery becomes materially harder. That window is often shorter than applicants expect: three to six months from the award is a reasonable outer limit for preserving optionality.
A second mistake is filing in the wrong court. Jurisdiction depends on the debtor's current registered address, not the address in the contract. If the debtor has restructured or changed its registered seat since the dispute arose, the applicant must verify the current KRS entry before filing. Filing in the wrong court wastes at least four weeks on a transfer order.
A third mistake is underestimating the translation requirement. Translations must be prepared by a sworn translator (tłumacz przysięgły) certified in Poland. Translations produced abroad – even by certified translators in other jurisdictions – are not accepted. For lengthy awards, this can take two to three weeks and cost PLN 3,000 to PLN 8,000 depending on volume.
- Verify the debtor's current KRS address before filing
- Commission Polish sworn translations immediately after the award
- Apply for interim measures in parallel with the recognition application
- Serve documents via bailiff in contested cases
- Monitor the debtor's asset position throughout proceedings
Sanctions compliance is a separate consideration for awards involving Russian or Belarusian counterparties. Polish courts will not enforce an award if doing so would require transferring funds in violation of EU sanctions regulations. Applicants must confirm that the debtor and the underlying transaction are not subject to asset freezes before filing – otherwise the enforcement clause, once granted, cannot be executed.
For UK companies with Polish counterparties, the post-Brexit enforcement framework adds a layer of analysis. Awards from UK-seated arbitrations are still governed by the New York Convention (the Convention operates independently of EU membership), so enforcement in Poland is unaffected by Brexit. A fuller discussion of dispute resolution options for UK companies is available at Dispute resolution for United Kingdom companies doing business in Poland.
Specific situations arise in real estate disputes. An arbitral award relating to a Polish property transaction may require registration in the land and mortgage register (księga wieczysta). Environmental encumbrances on the underlying asset can complicate both enforcement and asset realisation. Buyers and investors should consider environmental due diligence for Polish real estate before relying on property as the primary enforcement target.
To receive an expert assessment of your enforcement position, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.
Frequently asked questions
Q: How long does it take to enforce a foreign arbitral award in Poland?
A: An uncontested foreign award typically takes five to seven months from filing to the first enforcement action by the bailiff. Contested cases – where the debtor raises New York Convention defences – run twelve to eighteen months including any appeal. Domestic awards from Polish arbitral institutions take three to four months. These timelines assume complete documentation at the time of filing; missing translations or defective service add four to eight weeks.
Q: Is it a common misconception that Polish courts re-examine the merits of an arbitral award?
A: Yes. Polish district courts applying the New York Convention are not permitted to review the substance of the arbitral decision. The court's role is limited to checking the defined grounds for refusal – procedural validity, due process, public policy, and arbitrability. A debtor who simply disagrees with the outcome cannot use recognition proceedings to reopen the dispute. This limitation applies equally to domestic enforcement of Polish arbitral awards.
Q: What does enforcement cost in Poland?
A: The court fee for a recognition application is PLN 300. Sworn translation costs range from PLN 3,000 to PLN 8,000 for a standard award. Bailiff fees are set by statute as a percentage of the amount recovered – typically around 10% of the collected sum, subject to a statutory maximum. Legal fees depend on complexity, but applicants should budget for at least PLN 15,000 to PLN 30,000 in professional fees for a straightforward contested matter. Interim measure applications carry a separate court fee of PLN 100.
For a tailored enforcement strategy, reach out to our disputes team at disputes practice – Poland or email info@kordeckipartners.com.
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 enforcement proceedings. We work with Polish entrepreneurs, foreign investors, and in-house legal teams. To discuss your enforcement 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.