POLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Jaroslaw Kruk, Joanna Bogdanska and Urszula Brzozowska, KW Kruk and Partners Law Firm
dentiary threshold remains civil. Courts may refuse to admit vague or broadly framed fraud claims lacking factual substantiation, as the court assesses the evi - dence in accordance with the principle of free evalu - ation of evidence. In criminal matters, fraud must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Prosecutors bear the burden of presenting comprehensive, credible and consistent evidence that is sufficient to eliminate reasonable doubts as to the defendant’s guilt. The court will care - fully examine the reliability of witnesses, the authen - ticity of documents and the overall coherence of the case before issuing a conviction. 2.8 Claims Against “Unknown” Fraudsters Under Polish civil procedure, it is generally not pos - sible to initiate legal proceedings against unidentified fraudsters. The statement of claim must indicate at least minimal identifying details of the defendant (eg, name, business name, registered address). However, in civil cases where the perpetrator’s identity is initially unknown, a claimant can: • initiate pre-trial evidence preservation measures (eg, securing documents); or • where permitted by law, apply for disclosure orders against third parties to identify the perpetrator. A claimant may file a claim against a person described only by certain characteristics (eg, “the person respon - sible for the unauthorised transfer from account X”) if the factual basis is strong and specific. Once the identity is established, the claim can pro - ceed against the named defendant. Unlike in some common law systems, Polish courts do not formally allow proceedings against “unknown person” in civil matters. Investigative and Interim Measures In contrast, under Polish criminal law it is fully per - missible to initiate and conduct a criminal investiga - tion against an unknown perpetrator. The prosecution service or police can open an investigation without knowing the suspect’s identity and issue asset freez - ing or evidence preservation measures in accordance with criminal procedure. In such cases, the prosecu -
tion must demonstrate that a criminal offence has been committed and that there is a reasonable basis to believe that the offence was committed by an as- yet-unidentified person. To support such criminal cases, claimants may seek: • disclosure orders against banks or telecom provid - ers; • the preservation of digital evidence; or • criminal complaints that trigger prosecutorial inves - tigative powers. These tools can help to identify the unknown party and later amend the claim once the identity is revealed. 2.9 Compelling Witnesses to Give Evidence Court Powers to Compel Witnesses In Polish civil proceedings, the court and the prosecu - tor have the authority to compel witnesses to appear and give testimony. Upon request by a party, the court issues a summons requiring the witness to attend a hearing and, after being instructed as to their rights and obligations, testify under oath. Refusal to appear without valid reason may result in fines, and persistent refusal can lead to compulsory escort by court bailiffs. Obligations and Protections Witnesses are legally obliged to testify truthfully. How - ever, they may refuse to answer questions if doing so would expose them or close family members to criminal liability. In some cases, witnesses may also request that their identity or location remain confiden - tial, especially in sensitive fraud or corruption cases. Use in Civil and Criminal Matters These powers apply equally in civil and criminal pro - ceedings, although the procedural framework and the authorities competent to apply those measures are not identical. In criminal cases, prosecutors can compel testimony even at the investigation stage. In civil cases, the court’s role is reactive – it will compel a witness only upon formal application by a party and if the evidence is deemed relevant.
252 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook