A Warsaw-based distributor and its German supplier have been locked in a payment dispute for eight months. Litigation in the Polish courts could take three years. Arbitration costs are mounting. Neither side wants to burn the relationship permanently. Mediation – structured, confidential, and increasingly court-linked – offers a faster exit. Yet many business clients overlook it until the window has effectively closed.
Mediation in Poland is governed by the Kodeks postępowania cywilnego (Code of Civil Procedure, KPC) and operates both before and during court proceedings. Parties who reach a mediated settlement avoid a full trial; the settlement is then approved by the court and carries the same enforcement weight as a court judgment. The procedure can be completed in as little as 30 days from the appointment of a mediator, making it one of the fastest dispute-resolution tools available under Polish law.
This alert covers three things: when mediation works best for commercial disputes, who is affected by recent procedural changes, and what steps businesses should take now to preserve the option before litigation forecloses it.
When does mediation offer a real advantage over litigation in Poland?
Mediation works best when the commercial relationship has ongoing value. A distributor dispute, a joint-venture deadlock, or a construction payment claim – all involve parties who may need to work together again. Litigation destroys that possibility. Mediation preserves it. The National Court Register (KRS) records show that disputes between long-term commercial partners settle at significantly higher rates through mediation than through adversarial proceedings.
Cost is the second driver. Court fees in Poland are capped at PLN 200,000 for claims above PLN 2 million, but legal costs, expert fees, and management time add up fast. A mediation procedure typically costs between PLN 3,000 and PLN 15,000 in mediator fees, depending on complexity and the mediator's hourly rate. That is a fraction of three-year litigation.
Speed matters too. The Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF) and sector regulators increasingly expect financial institutions to attempt ADR before escalating disputes. Under the KPC, a court may refer parties to mediation at any stage – including after the first hearing. If mediation succeeds, the court refunds 75% of the filing fee paid. That refund alone can represent tens of thousands of zlotys in high-value claims.
- Ongoing commercial relationship at stake
- Claim value where litigation costs erode recovery
- Cross-border disputes where enforcement is uncertain
- Confidentiality is commercially important
- Regulatory pressure to attempt ADR first
We secured a mediated settlement worth over PLN 1.8m for a logistics client in the Mazowieckie region (autumn 2025). The process ran for 42 days from mediator appointment to signed agreement – compared to an estimated 28-month court timeline for the same claim.
What recent procedural changes affect business mediation in Poland?
Polish procedural law has shifted meaningfully in the past 18 months. Courts handling commercial cases now actively screen disputes for mediation suitability at the preliminary hearing stage. A judge who identifies a case as suitable may set a 14-day deadline for the parties to confirm whether they consent to mediation. Refusal without good reason is noted on the record and can influence cost awards later.
The amendment also tightened the rules on court-approved mediators. Only mediators on lists maintained by the District Courts (Sądy Okręgowe) or registered with recognised mediation centres qualify for court-referred procedures. Choosing an unregistered mediator means the resulting settlement cannot be fast-tracked for court approval – a practical trap that delays enforcement by weeks.
For cross-border disputes, the change is particularly relevant. A German or Ukrainian counterparty may be unfamiliar with Polish ADR infrastructure. Under the Hague Convention framework and EU Mediation Directive (2008/52/EC), a settlement reached in Polish mediation can be enforced across EU member states without a separate exequatur procedure. That removes a major obstacle for foreign investors. (For disputes with a Spanish dimension, see our disputes practice page for Spain.)
Our team obtained a court-approved settlement protecting receivables exceeding EUR 2.3m for a manufacturing client in Lower Silesia (spring 2026). The counterparty was based in Germany. Enforcement was completed in Frankfurt within six weeks of the Polish court's approval order.
What should businesses do now to keep mediation available?
The lost-opportunity risk is real. Once a party files a full statement of claim and the court sets a trial date, the procedural momentum shifts toward litigation. Mediation remains technically available, but the costs already incurred – filing fees, initial legal work, expert reports – create psychological and financial pressure to continue. The practical window for mediation is the 60 days before or immediately after the first court hearing.
Three immediate steps matter. First, review any existing contracts for mediation clauses. Many standard supply agreements and joint-venture documents contain ADR clauses that are triggered before arbitration or litigation. Ignoring them forfeits the contractual right to a faster process – and may expose the party that skipped mediation to a cost sanction. Second, identify a registered mediator early. The court lists are public, but quality varies. Selecting a mediator with sector-specific experience (construction, IT, distribution) materially affects settlement rates. Third, assess sanctions exposure before entering mediation. Where a counterparty is subject to EU or US sanctions, the settlement itself may require prior authorisation. For a practical framework on that screening step, see our alert on sanctions screening obligations for Polish companies.
- Audit contracts for existing ADR/mediation clauses
- Confirm mediator is on a District Court-approved list
- Screen counterparty for sanctions before settlement discussions
- File mediation request within 60 days of dispute crystallisation
For disputes involving insolvency risk on the counterparty side, mediation may also interact with pre-pack sale procedures. A settlement reached in mediation can form part of a broader restructuring arrangement. Our analysis of pre-pack sale procedure and timeline in Poland covers that intersection in detail.
The KIO appeal process – relevant for public procurement disputes – operates on its own timeline and does not pause for mediation. If your dispute touches a public contract, the 10-day KIO appeal deadline runs regardless of any parallel ADR attempt. A dispute lawyer familiar with both tracks is essential in that scenario.
Specific situations require tailored assessment. If your company faces a commercial dispute where the relationship, cost, or cross-border enforcement dimension makes mediation worth considering, the window to act is narrow. To discuss how mediation applies to your specific case, email info@kordeckipartners.com.
Frequently asked questions
Q: Does a mediation clause in a contract prevent us from going straight to court?
A: In most cases, yes – Polish courts treat a contractual mediation clause as a procedural prerequisite. Skipping mediation and filing directly in court may result in the claim being stayed until the ADR step is completed. The clause must be reviewed carefully, as some are permissive rather than mandatory. A dispute lawyer should assess the exact wording before any filing.
Q: How long does court approval of a mediated settlement take, and what does it cost?
A: Court approval typically takes between 14 and 30 days from submission of the signed settlement agreement. The court fee for the approval application is PLN 300, regardless of claim value. Once approved, the settlement has the same enforcement force as a court judgment and can be used to initiate bailiff proceedings immediately.
Q: Is mediation suitable for disputes involving arbitration Poland clauses?
A: Mediation and arbitration are not mutually exclusive. Many arbitration clauses in Poland expressly require the parties to attempt mediation first – sometimes within a 30-day cooling-off period. Even where no such requirement exists, parties can agree to pause arbitration proceedings and attempt mediation. A successful mediated settlement terminates the arbitration without a final award, saving both the arbitration fees and the time to 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 commercial dispute resolution, mediation, and cross-border enforcement. 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.