Mediation in Poland – when it works for business

A Warsaw-based distribution company faces a EUR 800,000 contract dispute with its long-term supplier. Court proceedings in Poland routinely take two to four years. The commercial division of the Regional Court (Sąd Okręgowy) has a full docket. Both sides know the relationship still has value – if it survives the process.

Mediation in Poland is governed by the Kodeks postępowania cywilnego (Code of Civil Procedure, KPC) and offers a structured, confidential alternative to litigation. A mediated settlement can be approved by a court and becomes enforceable within 30 days of filing an approval motion. The procedure typically concludes in six to twelve weeks – a fraction of the time required for a full trial.

This guide walks through the step-by-step mediation procedure in Poland, its realistic costs, the three business scenarios where it performs best, and the mistakes that cause it to fail. It also addresses how mediation interacts with arbitration and with court proceedings already under way.

How does mediation work in Poland – the procedure step by step?

Polish civil procedure recognises two entry points. Parties may initiate mediation before filing a lawsuit, or the court may refer them to mediation during proceedings. In both cases, a mediator from an approved list – maintained by the Ministry of Justice (Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości) – is appointed, or the parties choose their own. The National Court Register (KRS) reflects the legal status of any entity involved, which mediators routinely verify at the outset.

The procedure unfolds in four stages. First, both parties sign a mediation agreement or accept a court referral order. Second, the mediator holds separate preliminary sessions – typically within two weeks of appointment. Third, joint sessions take place, usually over two to four meetings. Fourth, if agreement is reached, the mediator drafts a protocol and the parties sign the settlement.

Initiation: written request or court referral, filed within 7 days of a court order
Mediator selection: from the Ministry of Justice list or by mutual agreement
Preliminary sessions: individual caucuses, confidential
Joint sessions: structured negotiation, mediator facilitates – does not decide
Settlement protocol: signed by parties, submitted to court for approval

The entire process – from initiation to court approval – typically runs six to twelve weeks. Contrast that with the average commercial litigation timeline of 24 to 48 months before a first-instance judgment. For disputes where the relationship matters, or where cash flow is at stake, that difference is decisive. Polish courts are required to inform parties of mediation at the first hearing, and a court referral suspends the limitation period.

What does mediation cost in Poland?

Cost is the first question most business clients ask. The answer depends on whether the mediation is court-referred or privately initiated, and on the value of the dispute. Under court-referred mediation, the mediator's fee is set by regulation: 1 percent of the dispute value for property disputes, with a floor of PLN 150 and a ceiling of PLN 2,000 per session. Private mediation fees are freely negotiated and typically range from PLN 300 to PLN 600 per hour per party.

For a EUR 800,000 dispute (roughly PLN 3.4m at current rates), court-referred mediation costs each party around PLN 2,000 per session – compared to court filing fees of PLN 17,000 and legal costs that can reach PLN 80,000 to PLN 150,000 for a full trial. The economics are clear. Mediation also avoids the enforcement risk: a court judgment must survive appeal before it becomes final, whereas an approved settlement is immediately enforceable.

There is one cost that clients consistently underestimate: preparation. A business entering mediation without a clear BATNA (best alternative to a negotiated agreement) and a realistic damages analysis will concede more than necessary. We secured a reversal of an unjust contractual penalty exceeding PLN 1.2m for a manufacturing client in the Mazowieckie region (autumn 2025) – the outcome turned on preparation, not the size of the opposing party.

If mediation fails, the costs are not wasted. The KPC allows parties to use mediation-stage information in subsequent proceedings only with mutual consent. This confidentiality protection encourages frank discussion. It also means that a failed mediation does not prejudice the litigation position.

In which business scenarios does mediation perform best?

Mediation is not the right tool for every dispute. It works best where three conditions align: both parties have something to lose from prolonged uncertainty, the underlying relationship has continuing value, and the dispute turns on commercial judgment rather than pure legal principle. Three scenarios illustrate this.

Manufacturing supply chains. A Polish manufacturer disputes a quality rejection with a German component supplier. The supplier holds the only certified source for a critical part. Litigation would take three years and destroy the supply relationship. Mediation, concluded in eight weeks, produced a credit note of PLN 480,000 and a revised quality protocol – preserving a EUR 4m annual supply contract.

IT and software disputes. A Warsaw-based SaaS company and its development subcontractor disagree over milestone deliverables and payment of PLN 1.1m. The source code is held by the subcontractor. Court proceedings would freeze product development. A mediated settlement, reached in five sessions, included staged release of the code against phased payment – avoiding a KIO appeal (public procurement review) that would have delayed a government contract rollout by at least six months.

Foreign investor disputes. A German investor's Polish subsidiary faces a landlord demanding early termination penalties on a commercial lease worth EUR 2.3m. The investor needs certainty for its balance sheet. Mediation produced an exit settlement in seven weeks – well within the investor's quarterly reporting window. Our team obtained interim measures protecting assets worth over EUR 1.8m for a similar client in Lower Silesia (spring 2026) while mediation ran in parallel.

What are the most common mistakes that cause mediation to fail?

Mediation failure is almost always attributable to avoidable errors. Understanding them is the first step toward preventing them. The most frequent mistake is sending a representative without authority to settle. Polish mediation practice requires that the attending representative hold a written power of attorney authorising settlement. If the other side's decision-maker is absent, the process stalls – and the window for voluntary resolution closes.

The second mistake is treating mediation as a discovery exercise. Some parties attend sessions to gather information about the opposing position, with no genuine intention to settle. This is a misuse of the process and, once detected, destroys trust irreversibly. It also precludes any future mediation attempt in the same dispute.

No authority to settle: representative lacks written power of attorney
Bad faith attendance: using sessions for intelligence gathering only
Unrealistic opening position: anchoring too high triggers immediate walkout
Ignoring confidentiality: sharing mediation disclosures with third parties
Skipping legal review: signing a settlement without counsel checking enforceability

The third mistake – and the one with the most serious long-term consequences – is signing a settlement without legal review. A mediated settlement approved by a Polish court has the force of a court judgment. It forfeits the right to relitigate the same claim. If the settlement contains ambiguous payment terms or omits a release clause, enforcement problems arise that cannot be corrected without a new lawsuit. This is complexity that costs far more than the original dispute.

For cross-border disputes, additional complexity arises from the intersection with sanctions compliance. Where one party is subject to EU or US sanctions screening, a settlement payment may require prior authorisation. Failing to check this before signing creates personal liability for the company's management board. For context on cross-border enforcement more broadly, see our guide on enforcing a Ukraine judgment in Poland.

How does mediation interact with arbitration and court proceedings?

Polish law allows mediation to run alongside or before both arbitration and court litigation. A party that has signed an arbitration clause can still agree to mediate – the arbitration clause is not waived. If mediation produces a settlement, the arbitration simply does not commence. If it fails, the arbitration clause remains fully operative. This flexibility makes mediation a low-risk first step even where a dispute lawyer has already drafted the arbitration notice.

Where court proceedings are already under way, a court referral to mediation suspends the procedural calendar. The court sets a deadline – typically three months – for mediation to conclude. If settlement is reached, the plaintiff withdraws the claim and the court refunds 75 percent of the filing fee. That refund alone can amount to PLN 12,750 on a PLN 17,000 filing fee. For disputes with a tax dimension, it is worth coordinating the settlement timing with any pending KAS (National Revenue Administration) audit, since a settlement that triggers a payment may affect VAT or CIT positions. Our analysis of KSeF penalties and avoidance strategies illustrates how payment timing decisions intersect with tax compliance.

Mediation also interacts with enforcement proceedings. A party that has already obtained a court judgment but faces a debtor disputing enforcement can use mediation to agree a payment schedule – converting an adversarial enforcement process into a consensual one. This is particularly relevant where the debtor is a foreign entity and enforcement would require recognition proceedings abroad. For a parallel example, see our step-by-step guide on enforcing a Slovakia judgment in Poland.

The Polish Financial Supervision Authority (KNF) has also encouraged mediation in financial services disputes, particularly between regulated entities. Where both parties are subject to KNF oversight, a mediated resolution avoids the reputational risk of public enforcement proceedings.

What to prepare before entering mediation:

Written power of attorney authorising the attending representative to settle
Damages analysis with best-case, realistic, and worst-case figures
BATNA assessment: what happens if mediation fails and litigation proceeds
Confidentiality protocol agreed internally before the first session
Legal review of any draft settlement before signing

The specific facts of your dispute determine whether mediation is the right instrument – and, if so, how to enter it with maximum leverage. Entering without that analysis forfeits negotiating position that cannot be recovered once sessions begin.

To receive an expert assessment of your dispute and whether mediation is the right first step, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.

Frequently asked questions

Q: How long does mediation in Poland typically take, and what happens if no agreement is reached?

A: Court-referred mediation must conclude within the deadline set by the court – typically three months. Privately initiated mediation has no statutory deadline but usually concludes in six to twelve weeks. If no agreement is reached, the mediator issues a protocol confirming that mediation was attempted. The parties then proceed to litigation or arbitration, with no prejudice to their legal positions. The confidentiality of what was said in sessions is preserved.

Q: Is a mediated settlement enforceable in Poland without going back to court?

A: Not automatically. A settlement reached in mediation must be submitted to a Polish court for approval. The court reviews whether the settlement is lawful and not contrary to good morals. Once approved, it has the force of a court judgment and can be enforced through bailiff proceedings. The approval process typically takes two to four weeks. This is a common misconception – parties sometimes assume the signed protocol is immediately enforceable, but the court approval step is mandatory.

Q: Can a foreign company use mediation in Poland if the contract is governed by foreign law?

A: Yes. Polish mediation procedure applies to the process itself, regardless of the governing law of the underlying contract. A German or Ukrainian company can participate in mediation before a Polish court or a Polish mediation centre. The substantive dispute – including the applicable law – is resolved in the settlement terms the parties agree. The approved settlement is then enforceable in Poland under Polish procedure. For disputes involving cross-border enforcement, the intersection with EU enforcement regulations and bilateral treaties requires separate analysis.

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 disputes, mediation strategy, and cross-border enforcement. We work with Polish entrepreneurs, foreign investors, and in-house legal teams. To discuss your situation, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.