POLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Jaroslaw Kruk and Joanna Bogdanska, KW Kruk and Partners Law Firm
ing 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 sched - uled shortly after the order is granted to allow the defendant to respond. 2.5 Criminal Redress Criminal Proceedings as a Recovery Tool In Poland, fraud victims often turn to the crimi - nal process not only to pursue justice but also to seek financial redress. Criminal proceedings are particularly effective when the defendant has hidden assets or when civil enforcement may be difficult. Victims can join the case as injured par - ties or civil claimants, enabling them to pursue compensation directly during the trial. Interaction Between Criminal and Civil Proceedings Civil and criminal cases can proceed in paral - lel. However, where the outcome of the criminal case is decisive for the civil matter, especially in establishing 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 criminal conviction. Importantly, evidence collected in criminal pro - ceedings 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 mechanisms allow claimants to secure the fol - lowing judgments without a need for a full trial:
• default judgement – issued when the defend - ant fails to file a response or appear at the hearing, based solely on the claimant’s filings; • payment order – granted in straightforward monetary disputes, where documentary evi - dence clearly confirms the claim; and • summary dismissal of meritless defence – if the defence is evidently unfounded or abu - sive, the court can reject it without extensive proceedings. Criminal Cases: No Conviction Without an Identified Offender In criminal proceedings, Polish law prohibits the conviction of an unknown or absent perpetrator; a verdict can only be issued against a named, formally charged individual. However, during the investigative phase, pros - ecutors and courts can: • secure and freeze assets believed to be linked to the crime; and • obtain court orders declaring seized prop - erty (such as funds in the bank account) as evidence, enabling its retention for potential restitution or confiscation, even before the suspect is identified. This mechanism allows victims to indirectly pro - tect their financial interests while the investiga - tion continues. While there is no separate standard of proof in Poland for fraud allegations, professional con - duct rules and judicial expectations impose a higher threshold of responsibility on parties and their counsel when fraud is pleaded. Legal rep - resentatives must avoid making unfounded or 2.7 Rules for Pleading Fraud Higher Standard for Alleging Fraud
287 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook