Code Of Civil Procedure Poland
Mariela Coxon
Statutory time limits, which are defined as preclusive time limits (meaning that failure to meet them renders a given procedural act null), are laid down in statutory laws. Such time limits cannot be extended or shortened. A statutory time limit starts running at the moment specified in a statutory law. There are two kinds of statutory time limit: time limits before which an action must be performed and time limits after which an action may be performed. Statutory time limits include time limits for lodging legal remedies, e.g. the time limit for lodging an appeal or a complaint.
Judicial time limits are also defined as preclusive time limits, but they are set by a court or judge. Judicial time limits may be extended or shortened, but only for an important reason and on a motion filed before expiry of the time limit, even without hearing the opposing party. These time limits start running from the moment when a decision or an order to that effect is pronounced; where the Code of Civil Procedure provides for automatic service, they start running when the decision or order is served.
Judicial time limits include time limits for regularising a judicial or procedural incapacity or for making good formal defects in an appeal or complaint.
Contractual time limits, as the name suggests, are set by agreement between the parties. A classic example is the staying of proceedings at the joint motion of the parties. If the parties file such a motion, the court may (but is not obliged to) stay the proceedings. The application of this type of time limit depends on the will of the parties alone.
Indicative time limits are normally addressed to judicial authorities (courts), not to parties. Not meeting them has no adverse procedural consequences. Their basic purpose is to apply the principle of swiftness of proceedings. An example of such a time limit is the time limit for a court to draw up ground of a judgment.
Where a final time limit is set (a date by which something must be done), what matters is the exact moment at which it expires. A time limit does not have to be specified as a day, but it must be defined by the occurrence of the event provided for by the contracting parties in a specific situation.
Procedural time limits are set using such units of time as a day, week, month or year. Pursuant to Article 165 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the method for calculating time limits in a civil procedure is regulated by the provisions of the Civil Code concerning time limits, if a statutory law, a court ruling, a decision by another state authority or a legal act sets a time limit without specifying how it is to be calculated (Article 110 of the Civil Code). The posting of a petition at a Polish post office of the national postal service provider in the territory of the Republic of Poland or at a foreign post office of a national postal service provider in the territory of another Member State of the European Union is deemed to be equivalent to lodging that document with the court. The same applies to the lodging of a document by a soldier with unit headquarters, by a person deprived of liberty with the administration of their prison or by a member of the crew of a Polish sea-going vessel with the captain of that vessel.
A day has 24 hours, beginning and ending at 24:00 hours.
A time limit specified in days expires at the end of the last day. A time limit expressed in weeks, months or years expires at the end of the day corresponding, by name or date, to the first day of the time limit or, if there is no such day in the last month, on the last day of that month. If a time limit is expressed as the beginning, middle or end of a month, this is understood to mean the first, fifteenth or last day of the month, while a half-month corresponds to 15 days. If a time limit is set in months or years and continuity is not required, a month is assumed to have 30 days and a year 365 days. If the end of the time limit for performing an act falls on a statutory non-working day or Saturday, the time limit expires on the next day which is not a non-working day or Saturday.
If the beginning of a time limit defined in days is a specific event, the day on which the event occurs is not taken into account when calculating the time limit. For example, if a court served a party with process summoning it to perform a specific act within a seven-day time limit on 11 January 2017, that time limit expired at midnight (24.00) on 18 January 2017.
Since 8 September 2016 the rules have allowed a court to serve process by a data transmission system if the addressee has lodged documents via such a system or opted to do so. An addressee who has opted to lodge documents via a data transmission system may opt out of electronic service.
A document served via electronic means is deemed to have been served on the date specified in the electronic acknowledgement of receipt of correspondence, even if that date falls on a statutory non-working day. The fact that electronic correspondence is received at night has no bearing on the effectiveness of service. In the absence of an electronic acknowledgement of receipt of correspondence, service is deemed effective 14 days after the date on which the document is uploaded to the data transmission system. The above rules require parties to check their electronic account at least once every 14 days.
Time limits laid down in days are expressed in calendar days. If the end of the time limit for performing an act falls on a statutory non-working day or Saturday, the time limit expires on the next day which is not a non-working day or Saturday.
A time limit expressed in weeks, months or years expires at the end of the day corresponding, by name or date, to the first day of the time limit or, if there is no such day in the last month, on the last day of that month.
Only judicial time limits, namely time limits set by a court or presiding judge, may be extended or shortened. A decision to extend or shorten a time limit may be taken either by a presiding judge or a court, but only for important reasons, with the assessment of the reasons being left to their discretion.
The Polish Code of Civil Procedure lays down statutory procedural time limits for lodging legal remedies according to the type of judicial decision (judgment (wyrok), decision on the substance of the case in non-contentious proceedings (postanowienie co do istoty sprawy w postępowaniu nieprocesowym), default judgment (wyrok zaoczny), order for payment in a procedure by writ of payment (nakaz zapłaty w postępowaniu upominawczym), order for payment in an order for payment procedure (nakaz zapłaty w postępowaniu nakazowym) and decision (postanowienie)). In particular, the following statutory time limits have been laid down:
A witness or a party to proceedings has an absolute duty to appear before the court. A witness must also appear before the court even if they have no knowledge of the circumstances of the case or if they have already decided to exercise their right to refuse to testify. A witness must excuse their absence (failure to appear) in writing before the date of the hearing. Submitting excuses for failure to appear at a later date will not prevent the court from imposing a fine on the witness at the hearing.
A procedural act carried out by a party after expiry of the time limit is null.
This principle applies both to statutory and judicial time limits. The nullity of a procedural act means that an act carried out late has no legal effects associated with performing it by statutory laws. A procedural act carried out after the expiry of the time limit is null even if the court has not yet issued the ruling being the consequence of the expiry of the time limit.
If the party has missed the time limit for performing a procedural act through no fault of their own, the court will reinstate the time limit at their motion. Reinstatement is not admissible, however, if the failure to meet the time limit has no adverse procedural consequences for the party. A pleading containing a motion to reinstate the time limit is to be lodged with the court before which the act was to be carried out no more than one week after the reason for failing to meet the time limit ceases to apply. The circumstances justifying the motion should be substantiated in the pleading. The party should perform the procedural act at the same time as it files the motion. After one year from the missed time limit, it may be reinstated only in exceptional cases. The reinstatement of a time limit for filing an appeal against a judgment annulling a marriage or pronouncing a divorce, or declaring the non-existence of a marriage is not admissible if even one of the parties has remarried after the judgment became final. A motion to reinstate a time limit that is filed late or is inadmissible under statutory laws is rejected by the court. The fact of filing a request to reinstate a time limit does not halt the proceedings or the enforcement of the ruling. The court may, however, depending on the circumstances, halt the proceedings or the enforcement of the ruling. If the motion is granted, the court may immediately proceed to hear the case.
Re-opening of proceedings on account of a criminal offence may be requested only if the criminal act has been established by a final conviction, unless criminal proceedings cannot be initiated or have been discontinued for reasons other than lack of evidence.
Invoking the right of set-off is one of the most common defences used in civil proceedings for payment in Poland. In 2019,(1) the legislator introduced procedural restrictions on raising this claim in proceedings by adding article 203 to the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP).(2) It was noted that the purpose of the new regulation was to prevent the abuse of this claim. Court practice indicated that a set-off often constituted a mere procedural ploy without a factual basis and that raising this claim was aimed only at prolonging proceedings in a case. After less than four years of article 203 of the Code of Civil Procedure being in force, the legislator is making the first amendment to some of the solutions contained in this provision.(3) The amendment Act (amending Act 2023) entered into force on 1 July 2023
c80f0f1006