A distribution agreement had run smoothly for three years. Then a pricing dispute over a PLN 4.2 million contract escalated into threatened litigation in the Warsaw District Court. Both sides faced a minimum 18-month court process, uncertain outcomes, and a commercial relationship neither wanted to lose. The question was not who was right. The question was whether court proceedings were the right forum at all.
Mediation in Poland offers businesses a structured, confidential alternative to litigation that can resolve commercial disputes within 60 to 90 days. The process is governed by the Kodeks postępowania cywilnego (Code of Civil Procedure, KPC), which allows courts to refer parties to mediation at any stage of proceedings. A mediated settlement carries the same enforceability as a court judgment once approved by the court.
This case study traces how a distribution dispute in the Mazowieckie region reached settlement through mediation – and what the outcome reveals about when mediation works for Polish business disputes, and when it does not.
What was the background to the dispute?
The parties were a Polish manufacturer and a regional distributor. Their agreement contained no dispute resolution clause beyond a general reference to "Polish courts." When the manufacturer revised its pricing schedule mid-contract, the distributor withheld payments totalling PLN 4.2 million. Both sides instructed lawyers. Both sides filed preliminary motions. Neither side had modelled the full cost of litigation.
The manufacturer's exposure was not just financial. The distributor held exclusive rights in three voivodeships. Terminating the relationship mid-cycle would have required the manufacturer to rebuild its distribution network from scratch – a process its logistics team estimated at 12 to 18 months. That operational risk shaped the entire strategy.
Our team at KORDECKI & Partners was instructed at the point where both parties had exchanged pre-litigation correspondence but no claim had been filed. That window matters. Mediation initiated before proceedings begin costs less, preserves more goodwill, and avoids the adversarial framing that court filings create. We recommended the Centrum Mediacji Lewiatan (Lewiatan Mediation Centre), one of Poland's principal commercial mediation institutions, which maintains a roster of accredited mediators with sector-specific experience.
The distributor's initial reaction was sceptical. Mediation was perceived as a sign of weakness. That perception is common – and almost always incorrect in disputes where the commercial relationship has ongoing value.
How did the mediation process unfold?
The parties signed a mediation agreement within two weeks of our recommendation. The Lewiatan Mediation Centre appointed a mediator with background in distribution and supply-chain contracts. The process ran over four sessions across 45 days – well within the 90-day window that the KPC treats as standard for court-referred mediations.
Session one was positional. Each side presented its factual narrative. The mediator did not rule on the merits. That is a structural feature of Polish commercial mediation: the mediator facilitates, not adjudicates. Parties who expect a decision at session one are typically surprised. Parties who understand the process use session one to signal priorities rather than to win arguments.
We secured a settlement exceeding PLN 3.8 million in resolved claims for the manufacturer, with payment phased over six months, for a manufacturing client in the Mazowieckie region (spring 2026). The distributor retained its exclusivity. Both parties avoided an estimated PLN 280,000 in combined litigation costs and 18 months of court proceedings.
When does mediation work – and when does it fail?
Mediation works when three conditions align: both parties have something to lose from litigation, the relationship has future value, and at least one side is willing to reframe the dispute around interests rather than positions. Remove any one of those conditions and the probability of settlement drops sharply. That is the honest assessment – and any adviser who tells you mediation works in every case is oversimplifying.
It tends to fail when one party is using the process tactically to delay enforcement, when there is a significant power imbalance that the weaker party cannot offset, or when the dispute involves a point of legal principle that only a court can settle definitively. Sanctions compliance questions, for instance – where a party needs a binding legal determination for regulatory purposes – are rarely suited to mediation. Similarly, a Krajowa Izba Odwoławcza (National Appeals Chamber, KIO) appeal in a public procurement context cannot be substituted by mediation; KIO proceedings are mandatory and time-bound.
Cross-border disputes add another layer. A foreign investor whose Polish subsidiary is in dispute with a local counterpart may prefer arbitration in Poland – proceedings before the Sąd Arbitrażowy przy KIG (Court of Arbitration at the Polish Chamber of Commerce) offer a binding award, international enforceability, and confidentiality. For those situations, our analysis of enforcing a France judgment in Poland illustrates how enforcement mechanics differ across dispute resolution tracks. Choosing the wrong track forfeits enforcement options that cannot be recovered later.
What are the transferable lessons for business clients?
Three lessons from this matter apply broadly to Polish business disputes. First, the dispute resolution clause in your contract determines your options before a dispute arises. A clause that simply references "Polish courts" closes off arbitration and may complicate mediation if one party refuses. Drafting a tiered clause – negotiation, then mediation, then arbitration or litigation – preserves flexibility and creates a 30-day cooling-off period before adversarial proceedings begin.
Second, instruct counsel before filing. Once a claim is registered at the National Court Register (KRS) or a court file opens, the adversarial dynamic is set. Pre-litigation advice costs a fraction of litigation fees and opens options that disappear once proceedings start. For joint venture structures specifically, our guide on the joint venture framework under Polish corporate law addresses how deadlock and exit provisions can be structured to reduce dispute risk at the drafting stage.
Third, mediation is not capitulation. A settlement that preserves a PLN 4 million commercial relationship, avoids PLN 280,000 in costs, and resolves in 45 days is a better outcome than a court judgment 18 months later – even if the judgment is favourable. The question is always: what does winning actually cost?
- Review all contracts for dispute resolution clauses before a dispute arises
- Assess whether the commercial relationship has ongoing value worth preserving
- Instruct counsel at the pre-litigation stage, not after filing
- Identify the correct forum – mediation, arbitration, KIO, or litigation – based on the dispute type
- Model the full cost of litigation, including management time and relationship damage
We obtained interim protective measures for a German investor's subsidiary in a separate supply-chain dispute in Lower Silesia (autumn 2025), where mediation had failed at the first session and the client needed court-ordered asset protection within 14 days. The lesson there was different: knowing when to exit mediation and move to litigation quickly is as important as knowing when to enter it. For a full overview of our dispute resolution services, visit our disputes practice page.
Specific circumstances in your dispute determine which track is appropriate. Choosing the wrong one forecloses remedies that cannot be recovered once proceedings are underway.
If your business is facing a commercial dispute in Poland – whether a contract breakdown, a distribution conflict, or a cross-border enforcement question – we will assess the appropriate forum, model the cost-benefit of each track, and represent you through to resolution: info@kordeckipartners.com.
Frequently asked questions
Q: How long does commercial mediation take in Poland?
A: Most commercial mediations at accredited centres such as the Lewiatan Mediation Centre conclude within 60 to 90 days. Court-referred mediations under the Code of Civil Procedure are subject to a standard 90-day timeframe, which can be extended by agreement. Pre-litigation mediations are not subject to a statutory deadline and can move faster if both parties are engaged.
Q: Is a mediated settlement enforceable in Poland?
A: Yes. A settlement reached in mediation becomes enforceable once the court approves it and grants an enforcement clause. This process typically takes two to four weeks. The approved settlement has the same legal force as a court judgment. A common misconception is that mediated outcomes are merely gentlemen's agreements – they are not, once court approval is obtained.
Q: Can a foreign company use mediation for a dispute with a Polish counterpart?
A: Yes, and it is often advisable. Polish mediation law does not restrict participation to Polish entities. Foreign companies should ensure the mediation agreement specifies the governing language, the applicable rules of the chosen mediation centre, and the enforcement mechanism. Where cross-border enforcement is a concern, arbitration may be preferable to mediation, as arbitral awards are enforceable in over 160 countries under the New York Convention.
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, arbitration, and litigation. 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.