POLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Jaroslaw Kruk, Joanna Bogdanska and Urszula Brzozowska, KW Kruk and Partners Law Firm
all relevant information, including any facts that may not support their position. Courts may also require a security deposit or other form of financial assurance to mitigate the risk of harm if the order proves to be unjustified. In addition, a follow-up hearing is usually scheduled shortly after the order is granted to allow the defendant to respond and challenge the measure using the remedies available under Polish procedure. 2.5 Criminal Redress Criminal Proceedings as a Recovery Tool In Poland, fraud victims often turn to the criminal process not only to pursue justice but also to seek financial redress. Criminal proceedings are particu - larly effective when the defendant has hidden assets or when civil enforcement may be difficult. Victims can join the case as injured parties or civil claimants, enabling them to pursue compensation directly dur - ing the trial. Interaction Between Criminal and Civil Proceedings Civil and criminal cases can proceed in parallel. However, where the outcome of the criminal case is decisive for the civil matter, especially in establish - ing liability, a civil court may decide to suspend its proceedings. While this can cause delay, it often strengthens the civil claim by grounding it in a crimi - nal conviction. Importantly, evidence collected in criminal proceed - ings may be used in related civil cases, increasing procedural efficiency and evidentiary strength. 2.6 Judgment Without Trial Civil Claims: Fast-Track Judgments In Polish civil proceedings, certain procedural mecha - nisms allow claimants to secure the following judg - ments without a need for a full trial: • default judgment – issued when the defendant fails to file a response or appear at the hearing, based solely on the claimant’s filings; • payment order – granted in straightforward mone - tary disputes, where documentary evidence clearly confirms the claim; and • summary dismissal of meritless defence – if the defence is evidently unfounded or abusive, the
court can reject it without extensive proceedings in accordance with the general procedural rules. Criminal Cases: No Conviction Without an Identified Offender In criminal proceedings, Polish law prohibits the con - viction of an unknown or absent perpetrator; a ver - dict can only be issued against an identified, formally charged individual. However, during the investigative phase, prosecutors and courts can: • secure, preserve and freeze assets believed to be linked to the crime; and • obtain court orders declaring seized property (such as funds in the bank account) as evidence, ena - bling its retention for potential restitution or confis - cation, even before the suspect is identified. This mechanism allows victims to indirectly protect their financial interests while the investigation contin - ues. While there is no separate standard of proof in Poland for fraud allegations, professional conduct rules and judicial expectations impose a higher threshold of responsibility on parties and their counsel when fraud is pleaded. Legal representatives must avoid making unfounded or speculative allegations, particularly when they concern criminal acts or moral wrongdoing. Lawyers are bound by the Code of Ethics for Advo - cates and Attorneys-at-Law, which prohibits the initia - tion of proceedings without legal or adequate factual justification. Making false or unverified accusations of fraud may result in professional disciplinary action or procedural sanctions, including adverse cost orders or dismissal of the claim. Requirement for Cogent Evidence In civil cases, the claimant must prove their claim on the basis of the preponderance of evidence. However, courts expect the claimant to provide clear, specific and credible evidence when allegations involve dis - honesty or criminality, even though the formal evi - 2.7 Rules for Pleading Fraud Higher Standard for Alleging Fraud
251 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook