The Strategic Technologies Platform for Europe (hereinafter referred to as STEP) is a European Union initiative established to, among other things, “ensure the sovereignty and security of the Union, reduce the Union’s strategic dependencies in strategic sectors, and strengthen the Union’s competitiveness by increasing its resilience and productivity.”[1] STEP was established by Regulation (EU) 2024/795 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 February 2024[2], which entered into force on 1 March 2024, and provides the legal framework for the entire platform. Its primary mission is to reduce the European Union’s dependence on external technology suppliers and strengthen European value chains in key technology areas. This is part of the implementation of the European Union’s core policy of “improving the competitiveness and resilience of the European economy through the green and digital transformation.”.

STEP is not a standalone funding program, but rather a platform coordinating funds from existing EU instruments. This platform integrates funds from 11 different European Union programs to coordinate support for projects with strategic potential. This mechanism allows for more efficient use of available funds by enabling the combination of different funding sources for technological and innovative projects.

One of the most important results of STEP’s first year of operation is the mobilization of significant financial investments in strategic technologies. According to the European Commission’s communication from March 2025, during the first year of operation, the platform managed to mobilize over €15 billion for investments in key technology sectors in the European Union. These funds come from investments in 11 European Union programs, which, through STEP, have been directed to support three main technological categories: digital technologies and deep-tech innovation, clean and resource-efficient technologies, and biotechnologies. Regulation (EU) 2025/2653 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2025 amending Regulations (EU) 2021/694, (EU) 2021/695, (EU) 2021/697, (EU) 2021/1153 and (EU) 2024/795 as regards incentivizing defense-related investments in the EU budget in order to implement the ReArm Europe plan[3]  (hereinafter referred to as Regulation 2025/2653) a fourth sector was also added, namely defence technologies.

Such a broad mobilization of resources has profound strategic implications. The European Union currently faces intense technological competition with the United States and China. Furthermore, “high inflation, labor shortages, supply chain disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Russia’s aggressive war against Ukraine, rising interest rates, and rising energy and input costs are all impacting the competitiveness of EU industry.”

Additionally, STEP also has an experimental and planning dimension: its structure and financial and coordination mechanisms are intended to serve as a test for a possible future European Sovereignty Fund, which indicates the European Union’s long-term strategy for building lasting instruments of this type.

Regulation (EU) 2024/795 of the European Parliament and of the Council

The legal act establishing STEP is the Regulation establishing a Strategic Technologies Platform for Europe (STEP) and amending Directive 2003/87/EC and Regulations (EU) 2021/1058, (EU) 2021/1056, (EU) 2021/1057, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) 2021/1060, (EU) 2021/523, (EU) 2021/695, (EU) 2021/697 and (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council (EU) 2024/795 of 29 February 2024 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulation).

The scope of the Regulation covers the establishment of STEP and the definition of the platform’s objectives (Article 2), the amount of financial support available under STEP (Article 3), the rules for the implementation of the Sovereignty Seal and the Sovereignty Portal (Articles 4-6), and the rules for reporting on STEP objectives (Articles 7-8). The Regulation also amends the wording of Article 1 of the Directive (Article 9) and Article 10 of the EU Regulations (Articles 10-19).

The Regulation’s adoption was motivated by the desire to guarantee the sovereignty and security of the European Union by reducing strategic dependencies in key technological sectors and strengthening the European Union’s global competitiveness. The Regulation’s adoption also aimed to facilitate the mobilisation of financing and create favorable investment conditions, particularly by facilitating synergies between EU programs.[4]

Characteristics of STEP and the competences of the Commission and the Member States

STEP is not a standalone funding program. STEP combines resources from 11 EU funding programs to support investments in strategic technologies and in those who can implement or manage these technologies. Support could also come from more than one EU funding program. For example, grants from the Innovation Fund could be combined with grants from the Cohesion Funds. Facilitating such cumulative funding is one of the goals of the STEP seal. In practice, this means that STEP breaks down the EU’s strategic priorities into specific actions and funding streams, identifying projects that can benefit from funding from various sources—both those directly managed by the European Commission and those implemented jointly with Member States. These resources can take the form of grants (i.e., non-repayable), but can also take the form of public procurement or financial instruments (e.g., equity, loans, and guarantees).

Although the STEP initiative was designed as a mechanism coordinated at the EU level, the role of the Member States is also crucial, as the platform does not replace national competences but relies on close cooperation between them and the European Commission. The key STEP-related tasks carried out by the Member States include: appointing a contact point for STEP implementation at the national level; providing incentives for countries to prioritize projects in the valleys of accelerated implementation of carbon-neutral technology production projects; and encouraging Member States to allocate a portion of their funds to activities supporting STEP goals. The role of the contact point in Poland is to: maintain direct contact with the European Commission regarding the adaptation of STEP activities at the national level and monitor the implementation of STEP goals in Poland; provide information on the STEP initiative to interested entities; provide information to companies with a sovereign seal on the possibility of obtaining further financing under national programs; and cooperate with managing and intermediary institutions at the national and regional levels responsible for individual funding programs.

The Regulation also lists a number of European Commission competencies related to the operation of STEP. These include: issuing guidelines that would further define certain concepts contained in the Regulation; granting the Sovereignty Seal; promoting the Sovereignty Seal; establishing and managing the Sovereignty Portal; cooperating with competent national authorities and other relevant stakeholders to coordinate and exchange information on financing needs, existing bottlenecks, and best practices in accessing finance; fostering contacts between technology sectors and promoting compatibility, coherence, synergies, and complementarity between EU programs; monitoring STEP implementation and measuring the achievement of STEP objectives; and submitting annual reports on STEP implementation to the European Parliament and the Council and making them public.

Four main strategic areas

In accordance with Article 2(1)(a) of the STEP Regulation, its purpose is to support, among others, the development or production of critical technologies across the Union or to protect and strengthen their respective value chains, in the four sectors mentioned therein (digital technologies and innovation in deep technologies, clean and resource-efficient technologies, biotechnologies, and from 2025 also defense technologies). Individual sectors will be briefly discussed below. For a discussion of individual sectors, it seems advisable to refer to the legally non-binding but practically helpful Commission Guidance on certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2024/795 on the establishment of a Strategic Technologies Platform for Europe (STEP) (C/2024/3209) (hereinafter referred to as the Guidance). They also define the term value chain which refers to: final products; specific components and specific machinery primarily used for the production of those final products; critical raw materials listed in Annex II to the Critical Raw Materials Act; related services that are crucial and specific to the development or production of those final products; and technologies covered by the Carbon Neutral Industry Act (CNIA).

Digital technologies

The 2030 “Getting to a Digital Decade” policy agenda establishes digital goals and targets related to digital skills, digital infrastructure, the digitalization of businesses, and the digitalization of public services. It lists several digital technologies contributing to these goals and targets, including artificial intelligence, 5G, 6G, blockchain, cloud and edge computing, and the Internet of Things. The Guidelines provide an illustrative list of digital technology areas relevant to STEP. These include advanced semiconductor technologies, artificial intelligence technologies, quantum technologies, advanced communications and navigation, advanced digital technologies, advanced sensing technologies, and robotics and autonomous systems.

Clean and resource-efficient technologies

According to Article 2(1) of the STEP Regulation, clean and resource-efficient technologies include carbon-neutral technologies as defined in Article 4 of the Carbon Neutral Industry Act. Examples include: solar technologies; onshore and offshore renewable wind energy technologies; battery and energy storage technologies; heat pumps and geothermal technologies; hydrogen technologies; sustainable biogas and biomethane technologies ; carbon capture and storage technologies; electricity grid technologies; nuclear fission technologies, sustainable alternative fuel technologies; hydropower technologies; other renewable technologies; energy efficiency technologies related to the energy system; renewable fuel technologies of non-biological origin; biotechnology solutions for climate and energy; transformative industrial technologies for decarbonisation; CO2 transport and utilisation technologies; wind and electric propulsion technologies; other nuclear technologies; advanced materials, manufacturing and recycling technologies, key technologies for sustainable development such as water purification and desalination, and circular economy technologies.

Biotechnologies

Recital 6 of the STEP Regulation indicates that biotechnology should be understood as the application of science and technology to living organisms, as well as parts, products and models thereof, for the purpose of modifying living or non-living materials to create knowledge, goods and services. This definition is intentionally broad and encompasses current and future biotechnology activities and is consistent with the uniform statistical definition of biotechnology developed by the OECD. Biotechnology can also be broadly defined as any technological solution that uses biological systems, living organisms or their derivatives to make or modify products or processes for a specific use. Application sectors of biotechnology include biotechnology-based industries (e.g. packaging materials, textiles, composite materials, insulation and construction materials, biofuels, paints, adhesives, solvents); environmental services (e.g. biosensors, removal of pollutants from soil/water/air); the agri-food sector (e.g. biofertilizers ) or the pharmaceutical and medical sector (e.g. vaccines, organoids, therapeutics). (gene and cell)”. The Guidelines also provide an indicative list of biotechnology areas relevant to STEP, based on statistical definitions derived from the OECD list. These include: DNA/RNA; proteins and other particles; cell and tissue culture and engineering; biotechnological process techniques; RNA genes and vectors; nanoinformatics and nanobiotechnology.

Defense Technologies

Defense technologies were not initially listed in the Regulation. They were added by Regulation 2025/2653. The reasons for introducing the fourth sector to the platform can be found in the recitals of Regulation 2025/2653, which include: unprecedented geopolitical instability; the rapidly escalating threats; the deterioration of regional and global security, in particular Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified aggressive war against Ukraine; the risk of conventional military threats; the desire to mobilise EU funds in a coordinated and synergistic manner for use in the field of defense, including for key pioneering digital technologies necessary for the development of defense products and technologies, as well as ensuring the use of STEP incentives to increase EU funding for innovative defense technologies to effectively respond to current and emerging threats and contribute to improving European competitiveness in line with the STEP objectives.

Regulation 2025/2653 also includes a definition of defence technologies, as they are technologies incorporated into defence-related products or necessary for their development and production, including defence-related products referred to in the Annex to Directive 2009/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.

Supporting projects through STEP

A key element of the STEP platform is the identification and selection of suitable projects of strategic importance to the European Union. According to the Regulation, STEP aims to ensure the sovereignty and security of the Union, reduce the Union’s strategic dependencies in strategic sectors, strengthen the Union’s competitiveness by increasing its resilience and productivity and mobilising financing, foster a level playing field for investment in the internal market, support cross-border participation, including for SMEs, strengthen economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity between Member States and regions, and promote inclusive access to attractive and high-quality jobs by investing in future-proof skills and adapting the Union’s economic, industrial and technological base to the requirements of the green and digital transformations. To achieve the above-mentioned objectives, criteria had to be developed to determine which projects should receive STEP funding. First, the project must contribute to one of the four sectors listed in Article 2(1)(a) of the Regulation and meet at least one of the following two criteria:

1. bringing to the internal market an innovative, cutting-edge and groundbreaking element with significant economic potential
2. contributing to reducing or preventing the Union’s strategic dependence and vulnerability to threats.[5]

Ad. a) According to the Guidelines: Innovative elements introduce the key criterion of ‘novelty’, which leads to significant improvements or changes in a given field or industry. State-of-the-art elements refer to new, recently developed technologies that may, for example, stem from the research base and are beginning to gain traction and offer opportunities for significant growth or impact. Disruptive elements refer to the most advanced, innovative and sophisticated technologies currently available or under development in the Union. STEP support should prioritise breakthrough innovations that have the potential to shape, disrupt or create markets and provide significant economic potential for the Union. The significance of the economic potential should be assessed in terms of technologies that could address different Union markets (rather than markets located in a given geographical area) or have a significant impact on the development or production of technologies. Technologies covered by STEP are those that are likely to generate the largest spill-over effects on other Member States, which can enhance the economic potential of the Single Market (as stated in recital 5 of the STEP Regulation). external cross-border activities can be measured by their positive contribution to economic growth, employment and investment in research and development.

Ad. b) “For the purposes of the STEP Regulation, a number of factors should be taken into account when determining whether technologies reduce or prevent the Union’s strategic dependencies:

– Contributing to the Union’s industrial and technological leadership: The Union’s industrial and technological leadership in the relevant sectors covered by STEP would provide the Union with a competitive advantage in the global technological landscape and help prevent lock-in. STEP could, for example, support the development of advanced manufacturing techniques, such as additive manufacturing, which could increase the Union’s competitive advantage in high-tech industries.

– Contributing to critical infrastructure at European level: Unrestricted access to essential components and technologies will enable the development and production of critical infrastructure in the EU without the risk of disruption or delivery delays. For example, STEP could support the development of critical technologies essential for space and ground satellite systems and electricity grids.

– Increasing production capacity: By increasing production capacity for critical raw materials, critical components or value chains within the Union, where there is a risk of strategic dependence within the Union, certain investments can directly reduce dependencies on third-country sources, thereby increasing the Union’s self-sufficiency and resilience. STEP could, for example, support the creation of production facilities for critical components or their value chain, including energy storage facilities, semiconductor chips or pharmaceuticals.

– Enhancing security of supply: Enhancing the security of supply of key inputs, components, and technologies in the Union implies a widespread recognition of the collective management of dependencies. This measure can address regional security of supply and thus enhance the Union’s ability to effectively address supply disruptions and vulnerabilities in any part of its territory. STEP could, for example, support the repatriation of production of specific critical pharmaceuticals where the Union has strategic dependencies, or by supporting projects involving critical raw materials.

– Promoting positive cross-border effects in the internal market: Fostering cooperation and coordination in the internal market can contribute to building resilient supply chains across industry and downstream sectors. This also fosters a level playing field, thereby reducing distortions and increasing overall competitiveness. STEP could, for example, support the coordinated development of advanced battery storage systems for renewable energy integration by pooling expertise and resources across Member States.”[6]

STEP Seal

One of the elements introduced by Regulation 2024/795 is the Sovereignty Seal (hereinafter referred to as the Seal), which is regulated in Article 4 of Regulation 2024/795. This instrument provides a mechanism for identifying high-quality projects. The Seal should also be used as a quality mark to help projects attract public and private investment by certifying their contribution to achieving the STEP objectives. The Sovereignty Seal should also support better access to Union funding, facilitating in particular cumulative or combined funding from several Union instruments. Member States should also be encouraged to take the Sovereignty Seal into account when granting financial support through their own programmes. Examples include the obligation for Member States to prioritize projects awarded the Seal of Sovereignty when completing their recovery and resilience plans, or the possibility to prioritize projects involving clean and resource-efficient critical technologies awarded the Seal of Sovereignty when deciding on the financing of investment projects from their respective shares in the Modernization Fund pursuant to Article 10d of Directive 2003/87/EC. Furthermore, they may decide to grant national support to projects awarded the Seal of Sovereignty and contributing to the achievement of the STEP objective.

The seal is awarded in competitions centrally managed by the European Commission. Entities can receive the distinction through STEP calls for proposals announced under five EU funding programs: Digital Europe, the European Defence Fund, EU4Health, Horizon Europe, and the Innovation Fund. Projects are evaluated for the seal in parallel.with the assessment of their funding under the STEP calls for proposals.

            The direct benefits for entrepreneurs associated with the granting of the seal include:

• priority treatment in national calls for EU programmes,
• strategic projects defined in the regulation on carbon-neutral industry (Net Zero Industry Act): obtaining a faster investment permit for the construction of installations.

In a sense, the seal also serves a political purpose, as it can be used as a symbolic instrument to strengthen the European Union’s position, especially in the current geopolitical competition between Europe and the United States or China. Seals can demonstrate the development of European economies in strategic technological areas. This aligns with the concept of a sovereign and strong Europe compared to other international players, as expressed in the recitals of the Regulation.

It is possible to provide examples of entities (both from Poland and other Member States) that have been awarded the seal of sovereignty.

An example is the OpenEuroLLM project, which is a pan-European initiative that brings together leading start-ups (from 9 Member States) and research organisations in the field of artificial intelligence to create an open, multilingual large-scale language model. The project received €20.6 million in funding from one of the five EU funding programmes managed by the European Commission, specifically the Digital Europe programme.

Among Polish projects, we can mention the Łukasiewicz Research Network – Industrial Research Institute for Automation and Measurements (PIAP), which focuses on underwater optical and acoustic communications, and the Lodz University of Technology, whose employees work on medical threat countermeasures. A full list of recognized projects can be found on the websites of the Ministry of Development and Technology or the European Union.

Prospects and challenges for 2026

Perhaps the most important challenge and change for 2026 regarding STEP is the expansion of cooperation within the platform to include defense technologies, as discussed in more detail in Chapter 4.4. Given the ongoing war in Ukraine and numerous international tensions, including internal crises within the NATO alliance, it seems crucial to invest in the defense sectors of member states to ensure the security of the community’s inhabitants.

The EIC STEP Scale- up program, supported by the European Innovation Council (EIC), will continue in 2026. This program is primarily aimed at SMEs that have already secured a planned investment, which carries significant risk, making it difficult to obtain funding from market investors. The process consists of two stages (application submission and a jury interview). Projects are assessed according to three criteria (company excellence, impact, and risk level). The program has a budget of €900 million for 2025-2027.

The Polish Ministry of Funds and Regional Policy, the Managing Authority of the FENG (European Funds for Modern Economy) program, which allocates funds to the implementation of STEP objectives, has announced the schedule of applications for 2026. Both the National Centre for Research and Development and the Polish Agency for Enterprise Development will accept applications for funding projects in the field of biotechnology, digital technologies and deep tech , as well as clean and resource-efficient technologies. According to the planned schedule, the first calls for proposals should launch in April.

Additionally, events such as the European Commission’s announcement of a billion euros to increase the use of artificial intelligence in key industries as part of efforts to reduce the European Union’s dependence on American and Chinese technologies, or the European Investment Bank’s allocation of 70 billion euros to the development of European technology companies, are worth mentioning. Although such initiatives are not directly related to STEP, they create a financial environment that can support STEP mechanisms in strategic areas.

Summary

STEP represents a shift in the European Union’s approach to industrial and technology policy. The platform’s introduction does not create any new funds, but facilitates the coordination of existing financial instruments to focus support on technologies that are crucial to the Union’s economic and geopolitical future. STEP aligns with the concept of building European technological sovereignty. The focus on digital technologies, resource-efficient technologies, and biotechnologies reflects the Union’s strategic priorities in the digital, green, and health transformations. The expansion of the scope to include defense technologies further underscores the growing importance of industrial resilience and security in the context of rising international tensions and conflicts.

A key element of the platform is the sovereignty seal, which not only serves as a quality mark but also strengthens the position of strategically important projects in the European financial system. This mechanism builds recognition for initiatives deemed crucial to European value chains.

Over the course of this year and the next few years, STEP may emerge as a tool of growing systemic importance. The integration of financial resources and incentives for member states to direct funds towards strategic priorities indicate that the platform is intended to be a permanent element of European economic policy.

Ultimately, STEP can be seen as the European Union’s response to the global technological race and changing geopolitical conditions. STEP signals the EU’s pursuit of greater strategic autonomy, the building of strong European value chains, and ensures that key future technologies are developed and implemented within the EU.

[1]Article 2 paragraph 1 in principle of Regulation (EU) 2024/795 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 February 2024 on establishing a Strategic Technologies Platform for Europe (STEP) and amending Directive 2003/87/EC and Regulations (EU) 2021/1058, (EU) 2021/1056, (EU) 2021/1057, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) 2021/1060, (EU) 2021/523, (EU) 2021/695, (EU) 2021/697 and (EU) 2021/241

[2]Article 1 paragraph 1 of Regulation 2024/795.

[3]Regulation (EU) 2025/2653 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2025, Article 5, point 1

[4]Recital (13) of Regulation 2024/795

[5]Article 2, paragraph 2 of Regulation 2024/795 and https://www.gov.pl/web/rozwoj-technologia/platforma-technologii-strategicznych-dla-europy-step accessed on 12/02/2026

[6]Commission Guidelines point 3.2 C/2024/3209 OJ EU.C.2024.3209 of 2024.05.13

Artykuł Strategic Technology Platform for Europe (STEP) Seal pochodzi z serwisu KIELTYKA GLADKOWSKI LEGAL | CROSS BORDER POLISH LAW FIRM RANKED IN THE LEGAL 500 EMEA SINCE 2019.

Publication date: April 14, 2026

Concluding international trade agreements is becoming increasingly easier and risk-free. International trade underpins the global economy more than ever before, due to globalization and the increasing unification of legal provisions governing this matter, along with the expansion of international agreements and intergovernmental cooperation. However, international law does not always address the needs of complex relationships between entities from different countries, which leads to a lack of certainty and predictability in legal transactions. To stabilize international contractual relations, efforts are being made to standardize private law at the international level and adapt state regulations to the needs of cross-border trade. This task is becoming increasingly easier due to the rapid development of new technologies and the digitization of organizational centers. Organizations such as the Hague Conference on Private International Law are engaged in the unification of private law.

1. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS WORKING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LAW

The Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH) is an international organization based in The Hague. The HCCH’s goal is to unify the rules of private international law and adapt it to a dynamically changing reality. The organization’s activities are characterized by flexibility and timelessness, ensuring that solutions adopted in earlier years remain relevant and relevant, even within the framework of domestic regulations. The organization has 92 members, 91 states (including Poland) and the European Union, which joined as a separate entity on March 3, 2007. This innovative, multi-level approach to integration improves cooperation in international law. The organization strives for integration not only in Europe and North America but also in other parts of the world. The opening of the Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific (HKPPM ) in Hong Kong in 2012 opened up opportunities for cooperation among local countries, allowing the organization to expand its global reach. There is a lively debate on the adequacy of various instruments for the unification of international private law, their form, rank, and scope.

HCCH collaborates with UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law) and UNIDROIT (The International Institute for the Unification of Private Law). They are called the “three sisters of private international law” because they collaborate dynamically to promote and unify private law worldwide. UNCITRAL, the UN Commission on International Trade Law, is the main axis of harmonization and unification in this field, and its members come from various geographic regions, representing different approaches to economics and legislation. UNIDROIT is an international governmental organization striving to unify private law, particularly customary law, in international trade. The Ministry of Development and Technology of the Republic of Poland is responsible for coordinating cooperation and liaising with these organizations. All three conduct organized activities for the development of private international law in various forms. They publish guides informing about the solutions they have jointly developed, as the instruments issued by these three entities are interoperable and complementary. Organizations promote their uniform interpretation and complementary application.

2. RULES REGARDING THE CHOICE OF LAW APPLICABLE TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS

On March 19, 2015, the HCCH approved the Principles on the Choice of Law in International Trade Agreements. This is a soft -law act, the first of its kind issued by this organization – it is not a normative act and is not binding on the organization’s members. These are recommendations that can be used by national and EU legislators in the legislative process regarding the possibility of choosing applicable law. The recommendations can serve as a model for national, regional, supranational, and international instruments. The organization strives to make regulations in this area binding, but currently focuses on creating conditions and suggesting to member states that they gradually amend their own laws. Arbitration courts may be guided by the recommendations, particularly if domestic law does not provide appropriate solutions for a specific type of situation, yet provides for the institution of choice of applicable law. Arbitration institutions in countries such as Thailand and Indonesia already refer to the HCCH principles in their work, strengthening the ability of parties to international trade agreements to choose applicable law. In Paraguay and Uruguay, these principles have influenced official legislative work on reforming international contract law. From 2015 to 2021, 16 institutions from four continents have incorporated the principles into their internal regulations or promoted them in other ways. This supports the principles of freedom of contract and party autonomy. The Permanent Bureau, the main body of the HCCH, which serves as a multinational secretariat, has invited nine organizations involved in the harmonization of international private law to collaborate with them to promote their principles and support these entities. The HCCH recommendations reflect global trends.

2.1. DOCUMENT CONTENT

The Act applies to situations in which the parties enter into an international contract, where each party is engaged in commercial or professional activity and wishes to conclude the contract under foreign law, other than the automatic provisions of general law. The chosen law governs all matters relating to the contract, in particular its interpretation, the rights and obligations arising therefrom, its validity and the consequences of invalidity (the document contains a non-exhaustive list of these elements). It does not apply to consumer or employment contracts, which protects consumers and employees due to the disparity in the parties’ positions. An international contract is defined there as a contract whose parties do not have their registered offices in the same country and all their relations are not connected with that single country. The Act includes a list of exclusions for matters such as the capacity of natural persons, bankruptcy, partnerships, other collective organizations, and trusts. This means that in the context of M&A, the rules do not apply to agreements concerning the internal organization of a company, for example, those establishing the rights and obligations of shareholders or management. However, in contracts beyond this scope, between a company and third parties, the law chosen by the parties need not be in any way related to them or the relationship between them; the choice may apply to the entire contract or only part of it. The choice of law must be made expressly or clearly indicated by the provisions of the contract and the circumstances to minimize the need for interpretation. Therefore, the choice of law applicable to the main contract does not automatically apply to ancillary contracts, such as a surety agreement, and when making a surety agreement, the choice must also be clearly stated if it is intended. A choice of law clause does not require a specific form to be valid; the choice can be made or changed at any time, and this does not affect the validity of the contract in terms of form. The validity of the choice of foreign law is assessed based on the chosen law. The invalidity of the contract cannot be the sole basis for challenging the choice of applicable law. A court may disapply a provision of foreign law when it clearly contradicts fundamental principles of public policy in the country where it adjudicates. These principles aim to unify the law, which will result in greater predictability and, therefore, legal certainty. International trade is impossible without this stability, as legal relationships extending beyond national borders are characterized by less predictability and increased risk. Therefore, an appropriate regulatory framework is needed, within which entities can operate with confidence and freedom, while at the same time being subject to reasonable constraints.

2.2. CHOICE OF APPLICABLE LAW AND CHOICE OF FORUM

Choosing the jurisdiction of a specific court is not the same as choosing the applicable law; this is a separate issue, regulated by the Hague Convention of 30 June 2005 on Choice of Court Agreements. Generally, choosing a court does not prejudge the choice of applicable law, but by designating a court located outside Poland, we also agree to it applying the procedural law in force in the country where it adjudicates. The choice of law applicable to the contract determines the choice of substantive law that will govern the very nature of the legal relationship. Therefore, when including the above clauses in the contract, the choice must be made precisely, clearly, and unambiguously to avoid any room for interpretation, as these are two separate issues. If we only seek to exclude the jurisdiction of Polish courts, while maintaining the Polish legal system as the basis for our relationship, we must make this clear. The German Federal Court of Justice, in its judgment of 16 September 2015 (VIII ZR 17/15), interpreted the factual circumstances in this type of case and found that the parties, by choosing the competent court, also implicitly chose the law applicable to the contract.

3. OTHER INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS

The leading international regulations on the choice of applicable law are the EU regulations: the Regulation of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations, known as Rome I, and the Regulation of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations, known as Rome II. The territorial scope of these regulations is crucial – these are European Union normative acts, applicable only in relations between its Member States, unlike the global scope of the rules developed by the HCCH. However, these are binding acts, directly implemented into the internal legal systems of EU countries, so their effectiveness is greater. The most relevant regulation on this topic is the first one, concerning contractual obligations – Rome I. The choice of law under this regulation primarily concerns the interpretation of the contract and the consequences of non-performance. The act also provides conflict-of-law rules applicable in the event of the parties’ failure to choose the applicable law – these rules are specifically defined for contracts for the sale of goods, contracts for the provision of services, contracts concerning real estate rights or the right to use real estate, franchise agreements, and distribution agreements. The regulation also defines its scope of application, which is similar to that defined in the HCCH principles; for example, matters relating to company law, arbitration agreements, and agreements on the selection of court are excluded. The regulation also governs the choice of applicable law in consumer and employment contracts, unlike the Hague principles. As in these cases, the freedom to choose foreign law is also provided for, but this choice must be express and unambiguous. Similar restrictions apply as in the HCCH document, as a purely domestic contract cannot be concluded with the choice of foreign law as the applicable law. The choice of law can occur before or after the conclusion of the contract, and for all or part of it. The regulation clearly drew considerable inspiration from the principles issued by the HCCH, yet they are significantly more general and universal. The instruments drafted by this organization are characterized by flexibility, allowing for their application in countries outside the European legal culture.

In the context of commercial relations with entities outside the European Union, the above-mentioned regulations do not apply, as they apply only to relations between Member States. In such cases, bilateral agreements between Poland and the country where the counterparty has its permanent residence or registered office should be consulted. If no agreement exists regulating this matter, Polish regulations should be relied upon.

4. POLISH REGULATIONS ON THE CHOICE OF APPLICABLE LAW

The core of Polish regulations enabling the choice of law applicable to international contracts is Article 353 § 1 of the Civil Code, which provides for freedom of contract. This is a fundamental principle of contract law, allowing for the free shaping of civil law relationships – taking into account the nature of the concluded relationship, the principles of social coexistence, and applicable law. Article 1105 of the Civil Procedure Code, on the other hand, allows for the choice of court jurisdiction, which is a separate issue. It is not possible to change the court jurisdiction for cases falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of Polish courts, in the field of labor law, concluded by a Polish consumer (unless it concerns the consumer themselves), or arising from an insurance relationship. A provision changing the court jurisdiction only for a claim brought by one party (other than the consumer) is ineffective.

The possibility of choosing the applicable law is established in the Private International Law Act. Article 4 regulates this issue in a manner very similar to the EU regulation and the principles developed by the HCCH, but in a much narrower scope. The choice of law should be clear and unambiguous and can be made after the legal relationship has been established. The legal capacity of a party to a contract is governed by its national law; in the case of a legal person, it is governed by the law of the country in which it is headquartered. The form and the very fact of performing or not performing a legal act are assessed in light of the applicable law chosen in the contract or by operation of law. Therefore, Polish law explicitly provides for the possibility of choosing a law other than the law itself governing the contract. For this reason, the application of the Hague principles is possible in situations not expressly provided for in Polish law. The principles can serve as a guide and interpretative rules, expanding the application of the law established by Article 4 of the Private International Law Act. Together with EU regulations, these provisions create a comprehensive instrument enabling the shaping of legal relations in terms of the choice of applicable law in a well-thought-out and safe manner, eliminating legal uncertainty and smoothing the flow of international trade.

Artykuł The rules regarding the choice of law applicable to international trade agreements pochodzi z serwisu KIELTYKA GLADKOWSKI LEGAL | CROSS BORDER POLISH LAW FIRM RANKED IN THE LEGAL 500 EMEA SINCE 2019.

A letter of credit is a financial instrument. It constitutes a form of domestic or international settlement conducted through a bank. It is a written commitment by the bank to pay a specified amount for documents submitted within a specified timeframe, as specified in the letter of credit. It protects the interests of both parties to the contract by ensuring the exporter’s immediate transfer of the receivable, while allowing the importer to condition payment upon the supplier’s fulfillment of specific conditions. Letters of credit are offered by banks operating in the Polish market – details regarding fees can be found in the tables of fees and commissions published on the banks’ websites.

The institution of letters of credit is regulated by the Act of 29 August 1997 – Banking Law. Articles 85 and 86 of this Act distinguish three types of letters of credit:

1. documentary letter of credit,
2. standby letter of credit,
3. cash letter of credit.

The process of settling a transaction using a letter of credit involves: the bank client (the person requesting the letter of credit), the issuing bank, the intermediary bank, and the beneficiary of the letter of credit. Additionally, a bank confirming the letter of credit may also be involved, but this is not a necessary feature of the letter of credit relationship.

A bank opens a letter of credit at the request of its client. It acts in its own name on the client’s behalf, fulfilling the obligation to a third party. In the agreement concerning the letter of credit opening, the bank and the requesting party specify the terms and conditions of the letter of credit and the manner in which the bank will fulfill the obligation arising from its opening.

The basis for instructing a bank to open a letter of credit is the underlying relationship between the bank’s client and the beneficiary of the letter of credit. The bank is not a party to this relationship. It is neither authorized nor obligated to verify whether the beneficiary of the guarantee has fulfilled its obligation under the underlying relationship. The bank’s sole responsibility is to verify whether the conditions specified in the letter of credit have been met, i.e., whether the beneficiary of the guarantee has properly presented the documents specified in the letter of credit.

Banking law requires that a letter of credit agreement be in writing. It is reserved for evidentiary purposes only. The letter of credit should include:

1. specifying the name and address of the principal (recipient) and the beneficiary (supplier),
2. indication of the amount and currency of the letter of credit,
3. its validity period,
4. description of the documents upon presentation of which the beneficiary is entitled to request payment under the letter of credit.

The issuing bank’s obligation becomes due upon the beneficiary’s presentation of documents in accordance with the terms of the letter of credit. Most often, the letter of credit agreement specifies the following documents:

1. invoice or other type of bill,
2. cargo specification,
3. documents confirming the quantity, condition and characteristics of the cargo, including certificates,
4. a transport document, e.g. CMR or international waybills, CIM or international air waybill,
5. certificate of origin,
6. insurance policy,
7. bill of exchange issued by the exporter.

The process of settling a transaction using a letter of credit is presented in the diagram below: [1]

Individual stages of settling a transaction using a letter of credit:

1. The parties to the agreement include a provision for settlement of the transaction by means of a letter of credit.
2. The importer gives his bank an order to open a letter of credit.
3. The importer’s bank opens a letter of credit and forwards its content to the intermediary bank.
4. The importer is notified of the opening of the letter of credit.
5. The intermediary bank confirms the authenticity of the opened letter of credit and notifies the exporter of its opening.
6. The exporter ships the goods and collects the required documents in order to obtain payment.
7. The exporter presents a complete set of documents to the intermediary bank, and the intermediary bank presents them to the opening bank.
8. The opening bank makes the payment to the exporter.

An additional form of financial security for a letter of credit may be:

1. the use of letters of credit that cannot be revoked, as they oblige the issuing bank to pay/disburse the funds under the letter of credit as soon as the exporter provides the necessary documents (specified in the terms and conditions of the letter of credit) and within the agreed deadline, and any changes to such a letter of credit are possible only when all parties to the transaction – the exporter and the importer – agree to it;
2. using confirmation of letters of credit, because then the exporter’s bank verifies the importer’s bank whether it will take on the risk of not receiving funds from the importer’s bank.

In summary, a documentary letter of credit serves not only as a form of payment in international trade but also as a security measure – protecting the interests of both the buyer (principal) and the seller (beneficiary). The principal minimizes the risk of payment before receiving the seller’s payment, as the issuing bank conditions payment upon the presentation of documents confirming the fulfillment of the obligation to the principal, while the beneficiary does not bear the risk of the buyer’s insolvency, as the bank’s obligation is independent. Considering the above, a documentary letter of credit is primarily used between foreign contractors who do not know each other closely, in accordance with the principle of limited trust.

Provisions of the Banking Law Act:

Art. 85. [Documentary letter of credit]

1. A bank, acting on behalf of a client but in its own name (the bank issuing the letter of credit), may undertake in writing to a third party (the beneficiary) to pay the beneficiary of the letter of credit an agreed amount of money after the beneficiary has fulfilled all the conditions specified in the letter of credit (documentary letter of credit).

2. A documentary letter of credit must include in particular: the name and address of the principal and beneficiary, the amount and currency of the letter of credit, the validity period of the letter of credit and a description of the documents upon presentation of which the beneficiary is entitled to request payment under the letter of credit.

3. The obligation of the issuing bank becomes due upon presentation of documents by the beneficiary in accordance with the terms of the letter of credit.

4. The provisions of paragraphs 1-3 shall apply accordingly to standby letters of credit.

Art. 86. [Cash letter of credit]

1. A bank, acting on behalf of a client but in its own name (the issuing bank), may undertake in writing to another bank to refund amounts paid to the beneficiary or to purchase bills of exchange drawn by the beneficiary on the designated bank (cash letter of credit).

2. A cash letter of credit must include in particular: the name and address of the person authorized to make payments, the amount and currency of the letter of credit and its validity period.

3. The obligations of the issuing bank become due upon payment to the beneficiary in accordance with the terms specified in the letter of credit, provided that the beneficiary presents an identity document.

4. If the cash letter of credit makes payment conditional upon the beneficiary meeting conditions other than those specified in paragraph 3, payment may only be made after all of these conditions have been met.

Art. 86a. [Dispositive nature of provisions on bank guarantees and letters of credit]

The provisions of Articles 82-86 apply unless the parties to the contract agree otherwise.

Art. 87. [Limitation of claims]

1. Claims arising from bank guarantees, sureties granted by banks and letters of credit that have become due shall expire after 6 years.

2. The limitation period for claims arising from guarantees and letters of credit begins on the date of submission of an effective payment request and within this period the claim is due, even if the obligation to which the guarantee or letter of credit was related has already expired.

[1] https://ksiegowosc.infor.pl/obrot-gospodarczy/windykacja/760063,Akredytywa-jako-forma-zabezpieczenia-platnosci-w-transakcjach-miedzynarodowych.html#google_vignette

Artykuł Letter of credit in Polish banking law pochodzi z serwisu KIELTYKA GLADKOWSKI LEGAL | CROSS BORDER POLISH LAW FIRM RANKED IN THE LEGAL 500 EMEA SINCE 2019.

Poland has for years represented one of the most restrictive approaches in Europe. That is precisely why the recent judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Commission v Poland, delivered on 19 June 2025 in Case C-200/24, is so important. It does not only affect one domestic provisions. It forces us to revisit a broader question: where is the proper legal balance between public health protection, professional ethics, consumer information, and economic freedom in the pharmacy sector?

The remarks are divided into four parts. First, there are outlined the general European framework for advertising medicinal products and pharmacies. Second, it is explained why pharmacy advertising is treated as a particularly sensitive area under EU law. Third, there is discussed the Polish model, which until now has been exceptionally restrictive. And fourth, there is addressed the recent CJEU judgment and the Polish draft reform, which together may fundamentally reshape the rules of pharmacy communication in Poland.

At EU level, the starting point is that Europe does not operate on the basis of a single, fully harmonised code for pharmacy advertising as such. Instead, the legal landscape is fragmented. There is a detailed EU framework for the advertising of medicinal products, especially through Directive 2001/83/EC, while the advertising of pharmacies themselves is still regulated primarily by national law. But that national autonomy is not unlimited. It must remain consistent with the internal market freedoms, with the E-Commerce Directive, and with the principle of proportionality under EU law. That is exactly where the Polish system ran into difficulty.

The most important EU instrument is Directive 2001/83/EC, the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use. Its advertising rules, especially Articles 86 to 100, are the backbone of pharmaceutical advertising law in Europe. The directive defines advertising broadly and regulates both what may be promoted and how promotion may take place. It is not simply a technical instrument. It reflects a policy choice: medicinal products are not treated like ordinary consumer goods. The law is designed to protect public health, prevent misleading influence on therapeutic choices, and promote rational use of medicines. Those three ideas run through the whole European model.

One major feature of this model is the prohibition on advertising prescription-only medicines to the general public. In Europe, direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicines is not accepted. Prescription medicines may be promoted only to healthcare professionals such as doctors or pharmacists. By contrast, over-the-counter products may be advertised to the public, but even then under strict conditions: the message must be objective, not misleading, and consistent with the authorised product information. It must not exaggerate therapeutic benefits, and it must encourage rational use rather than emotional or manipulative consumption.

EU law also prohibits advertising of medicinal products that do not yet have a marketing authorisation. And, more generally, any advertising must comply with the product’s Summary of Product Characteristics and be grounded in reliable scientific data. That requirement matters because it shows that pharmaceutical advertising is not seen only as commercial speech. It is also treated as a health-related communication which may affect patient behaviour and, in turn, health outcomes. That is why the margin for persuasive marketing is narrower here than in many other sectors.

A further layer of regulation concerns the forms of promotion. Across Europe, various restrictions exist on price promotions, gifts, loyalty schemes, samples, and other financial incentives linked to medicines. There is a recurring concern that financial inducements may distort therapeutic choices and turn medicines into ordinary promotional goods. In some jurisdictions, even discount-based campaigns for medicinal products are viewed with suspicion. The same logic applies to the use of gifts or material advantages. These restrictions are all rooted in the same policy concern: that the purchase and use of medicines should not be driven by aggressive sales techniques.

This leads to an important distinction which is often blurred in practice but is central in law: the distinction between advertising medicines and advertising pharmacies. The former is partly harmonised at EU level; the latter is not. In many Member States, pharmacies may advertise at least some aspects of their activity. Typically, they may communicate their location, opening hours, available pharmaceutical services, sometimes home delivery, vaccination or testing services, and other forms of patient support. This is especially relevant in the digital environment, where EU law has also developed a framework for online sale of medicines, including the common logo for legal online pharmacies and national registers of authorised online sellers. The rise of e-pharmacy and digital health services makes it increasingly artificial to treat all pharmacy communication as inherently suspect.

Against that background, Poland became an outlier. Under Article 94a(1) of the Polish Pharmaceutical Law, there was, until now, a near-total prohibition of advertising of pharmacies, pharmacy outlets, and their activity. In practice, the only clearly permitted category was information on location and opening hours. Enforcement lay with the regional pharmaceutical inspector, who could order cessation of the prohibited activity and impose administrative fines of up to PLN 50,000. What made the Polish system especially problematic was not only the text of the law, but also its interpretation. Neutral statements such as “You can pay by card here” or “We speak Lithuanian here” were treated as unlawful advertising. In other words, the concept of advertising was interpreted so expansively that even practical consumer information could trigger sanctions.

Legally speaking, that approach was always vulnerable. The reason is simple. Even if there is no single EU regulation specifically on pharmacy advertising, Member States cannot legislate in a way that disregards primary EU law and directly applicable internal market principles. In particular, domestic rules must remain compatible with freedom of establishment under Article 49 TFEU, freedom to provide services under Article 56 TFEU, and, where online communication is concerned, with Article 8(1) of Directive 2000/31/EC on electronic commerce, which protects the use of commercial communications by members of regulated professions subject to professional rules. That is the legal architecture against which the CJEU assessed Poland’s total ban.

The judgment of 19 June 2025 in Case C-200/24 is therefore a landmark. The Court held that Poland had failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 TFEU, Article 56 TFEU, and Article 8(1) of the E-Commerce Directive. The key point was proportionality. Poland argued that the broad ban was justified by public health concerns, especially the need to combat excessive consumption and overuse of medicines. The Court did not deny that public health is a legitimate aim. But it held that the Polish rule went beyond what was necessary to achieve that aim. In the Court’s view, an absolute prohibition covering essentially all pharmacy advertising was too restrictive and disproportionate.

That proportionality analysis is crucial, especially for an international audience. The Court did not say that pharmacy advertising must be entirely free. Nor did it say that Member States are prevented from regulating pharmacy communications. What it said was more nuanced and more important: yes, a Member State may regulate, restrict, and supervise pharmacy advertising in order to protect public health; but no, it may not impose a blanket prohibition that captures all commercial communication regardless of content, medium, or effect. That is classic EU proportionality review: the legitimacy of the objective is recognised, but the means chosen must be suitable, necessary, and balanced.

The Court also made another important point. Pharmacies do not merely sell medicines. They also provide services. Those services may include pharmaceutical care, diagnostics, advisory functions, and other health-related activities not reducible to drug distribution alone. Once that is acknowledged, the Polish state’s argument becomes weaker. If a pharmacy wants to communicate that it offers a certain lawful service, or that it provides patient-friendly access conditions, or that it has certain facilities, that is not the same thing as stimulating irrational medicine consumption. The Court accepted that pharmacy advertising can also serve legitimate informational purposes and may benefit consumers, including by enabling them to compare prices or learn about available services.

This reasoning has direct practical consequences. It means that the legal debate in Poland is no longer about whether the old absolute prohibition is sustainable. It is not. The real question now is what should replace it. And that is where the draft reform enters the picture.

According to the Polish government’s published project, the reform is intended to implement the CJEU judgment by repealing the total ban and replacing it with a regulated advertising model. The project explicitly states that the purpose is to abolish the total prohibition in Article 94a and define rules for pharmacy advertising compatible with EU law while preserving the ethical framework of the profession. The draft also aims to update sanctions, which had remained unchanged for many years.

Under the draft, pharmacy advertising would be legally defined as any activity consisting in informing or encouraging the use of a pharmacy’s offer in order to increase sales of available assortment, services provided, or implemented programmes. That is a broad definition, but unlike the previous model it does not operate through total prohibition. Instead, it creates a regulated field of permitted communication with specific exclusions. This is a major conceptual shift: from prohibition with a tiny informational exception, to permission with a detailed list of safeguards and prohibitions.

What, then, would remain prohibited? The draft law would prohibit comparative advertising within the meaning of Polish unfair competition law. It would prohibit advertising directed at children or adolescents under 18, and also the use of elements specifically appealing to minors. It would prohibit the use of images or recommendations of famous persons, scientists, and persons with medical education, or even persons suggesting such education. It would prohibit fear-based messaging, including suggestions that failure to use a pharmacy’s offer may worsen health. It would also prohibit unlawful content, violations of professional secrecy, and breaches of pharmaceutical ethics. Finally, and very importantly, it would prohibit offering material benefits such as loyalty programmes or conditional discounts. So the reform is liberalising in structural terms, but still restrictive in substance.

Enforcement would remain in the hands of the regional pharmaceutical inspector. If the inspector orders the cessation of unlawful advertising, that decision would remain immediately enforceable. At the same time, sanctions would become more severe: according to the draft law and the government’s project summary, the maximum administrative fine would be increased from PLN 50,000 to PLN 100,000. So from a compliance perspective, the message is mixed but clear: there will be more room to communicate, but also stronger supervisory expectations and potentially higher penalties for getting it wrong.

The transitional provisions are also extremely important for practice. Administrative proceedings initiated under the old Article 94a and linked to Article 129b, if still pending when the new rules enter into force, are expected to be discontinued. That would be highly beneficial for pharmacy operators currently exposed to ongoing proceedings. The source also raises a further issue: possible state liability for damage caused by final administrative decisions based on a national norm later found contrary to EU law. In Polish private law, that discussion would likely arise in connection with the provisions on state liability for unlawful normative acts and administrative decisions. Even if the practical path to compensation is complex, the legal point is important: the CJEU judgment is not only prospective in effect; it may also shape litigation about the consequences of the previous enforcement model.

Finally, the reform has also provoked understandable concern from the pharmacy profession itself. Representatives of the pharmacy chamber have expressed fear that liberalisation could reopen the door to aggressive marketing techniques, especially online. They are particularly concerned about the future role of artificial intelligence in targeted communications, the difficulty of distinguishing neutral health information from covert advertising, and the risk that large urban pharmacy operators will gain a disproportionate competitive advantage over smaller local pharmacies. Those are serious concerns, and in my view they should not be dismissed. They show that the post-C-200/24 model in Poland will not be a simple story of deregulation. It will be a story of re-regulation, with new lines of dispute around digital marketing, platform visibility, algorithmic targeting, and professional ethics.

This is also where the AI Act begins to matter conceptually. There is no pharmacy-specific lex specialis for AI-driven pharmacy advertising, so the general transparency and governance logic of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 may become increasingly relevant in future compliance analysis. Even if the AI Act does not itself answer the pharmacy advertising question, it provides the broader regulatory context in which digital promotional practices will be assessed.

Three final observations.

First, at EU level, pharmacy advertising sits at the intersection of public health law, market regulation, professional ethics, and digital communications law. It is not a purely national topic, even though much of the detailed regulation remains domestic.

Second, Poland has until now embodied the most restrictive end of the spectrum, largely because of the nearly absolute ban in Article 94a and its expansive administrative enforcement. That model has now been authoritatively rejected by the CJEU as incompatible with EU law.

Third, the future Polish regime will not simply become “advertising-friendly.” Rather, it will move toward a controlled communication model: broader than before, but still ethically constrained, professionally supervised, and heavily conditioned by public health concerns. For international lawyers and foreign investors, this makes Poland especially interesting. It is becoming a case study of how an over-restrictive national rule can be corrected through EU free movement law, yet still replaced by a highly regulated domestic framework rather than by pure liberalisation.

Artykuł Pharmacy Advertising in the European Union, with a Focus on Poland after the CJEU Judgment of 19 June 2025 pochodzi z serwisu KIELTYKA GLADKOWSKI LEGAL | CROSS BORDER POLISH LAW FIRM RANKED IN THE LEGAL 500 EMEA SINCE 2019.

On March 26, 2026, our law firm, KG Legal Kiełtyka Gładkowski, will participate in the annual Job Fair organized by the Jagiellonian University. The event will take place from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. at the Jagiellonian University Auditorium Maximum at 33 Krupnicza Street.

The Jagiellonian University Job Fair is one of the most important recruitment events in Krakow, bringing together employers from many sectors – from international corporations and public institutions to specialized consulting firms and law firms.

Let’s meet at our stand

During the event, we invite you to visit our stand, where you will be able to:

– talk to our team about your career path as a lawyer,

– learn more about working in a modern law firm,

– get tips on professional development,

– get acquainted with current cooperation opportunities.

Who we are – profile of KG Legal Kiełtyka Gładkowski

KG Legal Kiełtyka Gładkowski is a modern law firm specializing in serving business clients, in particular in the areas of:

– economic and commercial law,

– company services,

– new technologies and e-commerce law,

– labor law,

– investment and contract management.

We combine legal experience with a practical approach to business, supporting both Polish and international entities. We prioritize development, innovation, and teamwork based on partnership.

Who will you meet at the fair?

The Jagiellonian University Job Fair is an excellent opportunity to meet a wide range of employers. Exhibitors include: EY, IBM, Google Poland, Accenture, State Street Bank, ABB, HAYS Poland, Lufthansa Group Business Services, Bank Millennium, Social Insurance Institution, Office of Competition and Consumer Protection, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, World Bank Group and many other companies and institutions.

Who are we looking for?

During the fair we will be particularly interested in learning about:

– law students,

– students of new technologies,

– administration students,

– people interested in commercial law and services for entrepreneurs,

– candidates open to development in a dynamic work environment.

We value:

– commitment and willingness to learn,

– analytical thinking skills,

– good work organization,

– knowledge of foreign languages (English is welcome).

We offer the opportunity to gain practical experience, participate in interesting projects, and have a real impact on the development of the law firm.

See you at the fair!

If you are considering a career in a modern law firm and want to gain experience working with businesses, be sure to visit our stand.

March 26, 2026, Auditorium Maximum UJ – we are waiting for you!

Artykuł KG Legal Kiełtyka Gładkowski at the Jagiellonian University Job Fair – March 26, 2026 pochodzi z serwisu KIELTYKA GLADKOWSKI LEGAL | CROSS BORDER POLISH LAW FIRM RANKED IN THE LEGAL 500 EMEA SINCE 2019.

On 25 March 2026, the latest edition of the Legal 500 EMEA ranking – one of the most prestigious legal directories worldwide – was officially published.

We are pleased to announce that KG Legal Kiełtyka Gładkowski has once again been recognized in the ranking – continuously since 2019 – further strengthening its position among recommended law firms in Poland.

Strong Position in Key Practice Areas

In this year’s edition of Legal 500, our firm has been recommended in three important practice areas:

• Data Privacy and Data Protection

• Healthcare and Life Sciences

• Private Client

We are particularly proud to maintain and strengthen our position in highly demanding and specialized areas such as Life Sciences and Data Privacy, which require a combination of regulatory expertise, sector knowledge, and international experience.

Cross-Border Experience

The Legal 500 2026 recommendations clearly highlight the international nature of our practice and our extensive experience in cross-border matters.

KG Legal advises both Polish companies expanding internationally and foreign investors operating in Poland. Our work includes complex projects requiring coordination across multiple jurisdictions, sector-specific regulatory knowledge, and a deep understanding of international business environments.

Individual Recognitions

This year’s ranking also brings significant individual distinctions for our team. Our lawyers have been named and recommended in the testimonials as leading partners, reflecting their strong reputation and direct client recognition.

Moreover, one of our lawyers has once again been ranked as a Leading Individual in the Healthcare and Life Sciences category.

This is a particularly prestigious distinction, as only a limited number of lawyers in Poland receive this recognition, highlighting exceptional expertise, market position, and client trust.

Client Testimonials – Professionalism and Relationship-Driven Approach

This year’s client feedback emphasizes both the quality of our legal services and the way we work with clients:

“The individuals I have worked with at KG Legal demonstrate exceptional professionalism, discretion, and a sincere commitment to client interests.”

“The individuals I’ve gotten to know at KG Legal leave a lasting impression through their integrity, kindness, and commitment to excellence. They are approachable, thoughtful, and willing to go the extra mile to build relationships.”

These testimonials underline not only our legal expertise, but also our strong focus on building trust, maintaining long-term relationships, and delivering client-centered service.

Expertise in Technology and Regulation

The ranking also highlights our experience in innovative and highly regulated areas:

“The team of KG Legal is unique for their knowledge and insights about innovative matters such as AI, data privacy and data protection. At the same time, they are very flexible about new issues and are responsive. I may recommend companies doing businesses in or in relation to Poland to engage KG Legal.”

This recognition confirms our capability to support clients in areas where law intersects with technology and rapidly evolving regulatory frameworks.

Continuous Development Since 2019

Our continuous presence in the Legal 500 ranking since 2019 reflects the firm’s consistent growth and the ongoing development of our international legal capabilities.

This year’s results clearly demonstrate that KG Legal continues to strengthen its position as a trusted advisor for clients involved in cross-border business, offering broad expertise, practical insight, and international experience.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank our Clients for their trust and our entire team at KG Legal for their dedication and professionalism, which make these achievements possible.

Artykuł KG Legal KIELTYKA GLADKOWSKI in the Legal 500 2026 Ranking – Confirmation of International Capabilities pochodzi z serwisu KIELTYKA GLADKOWSKI LEGAL | CROSS BORDER POLISH LAW FIRM RANKED IN THE LEGAL 500 EMEA SINCE 2019.

On 17 March 2026, a conference entitled “Cross-regulatory interplay and cooperation in the EU: a data protection perspective” took place in Brussels (Borschette Center). The event focused on regulatory cooperation in the European Union from a data protection perspective and gathered representatives of EU institutions, regulatory authorities, academia, and practitioners in law and digital policy.

KG Legal Kiełtyka Gładkowski participated in the conference, following the latest developments in interpretation and cooperation between key regulatory regimes shaping the EU digital economy.

https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2026/conference-cross-regulatory-cooperation-eu-17-march-programme-available-now_en

Key focus of the conference

The purpose of the conference was to provide a high-level overview of the activities of the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) in the context of the growing interdependence of various regulatory frameworks within the European Union, in particular in the areas of:

• data protection

• competition law

• regulation of digital platforms

• supervision of digital markets

Discussions focused on how different legal regimes and supervisory authorities interact in practice, as well as how cooperation between enforcement bodies is ensured at both EU and Member State levels.

Particular attention was given to:

• synergies between data protection and competition law

• complementarity of GDPR and DMA

• interaction between DSA and GDPR in practice

• coordination mechanisms between regulatory authorities

• impact of new EU digital regulations on the market and user protection

Main discussion panels

Panel 1: Data protection and competition: how to reap the synergies

Panel 2: DMA and GDPR: a relationship of complementarity

Panel 3: DSA and GDPR: how they interact in practice

Key speakers and participants

The conference included keynote speeches by representatives of EU institutions, including:

• Henna Virkkunen – Executive Vice-President of the European Commission

• Javier Zarzalejos – Member of the European Parliament, Chair of the LIBE Committee

Participants included experts from EU institutions, regulatory authorities, academia, and the private sector, such as:

• Anu Taalus – Chair of the European Data Protection Board

• Aymeric Pontvianne – Chief Economist at CNIL

• Claudia Berg – Partner at Covington & Burling LLP

• Massimiliano Kadar – European Commission, DG COMP

• Wolfgang Kerber – University of Bonn

• Katarzyna Prusak-Górniak – Permanent Representation of Poland to the EU

Importance of regulatory cooperation

The conference served as an important platform for dialogue between regulators, EU institutions, and experts working in the digital economy.

In the context of rapidly evolving EU digital regulations – including GDPR, DMA and DSA – the discussions highlighted the importance of consistent interpretation, effective cooperation between authorities, and coordinated enforcement across jurisdictions.

Artykuł KG Legal Kiełtyka Gładkowski at the Conference on Cross-Regulatory Cooperation in the EU – Brussels, 17 March 2026 pochodzi z serwisu KIELTYKA GLADKOWSKI LEGAL | CROSS BORDER POLISH LAW FIRM RANKED IN THE LEGAL 500 EMEA SINCE 2019.

Już 26 marca 2026 r. nasza kancelaria KG Legal Kiełtyka Gładkowski weźmie udział w corocznych Targach Pracy organizowanych przez Uniwersytet Jagielloński. Wydarzenie odbędzie się w godzinach 10:00–15:00 w Auditorium Maximum UJ przy ul. Krupniczej 33.

Targi Pracy UJ to jedno z najważniejszych wydarzeń rekrutacyjnych w Krakowie, gromadzące pracodawców z wielu sektorów – od międzynarodowych korporacji, przez instytucje publiczne, po wyspecjalizowane firmy doradcze i kancelarie prawne.

Spotkajmy się przy naszym stoisku

Podczas wydarzenia zapraszamy do odwiedzenia naszego stoiska, gdzie będzie można:

– porozmawiać z naszym zespołem o ścieżce kariery w zawodzie prawnika,

– dowiedzieć się więcej o pracy w nowoczesnej kancelarii prawnej,

– uzyskać wskazówki dotyczące rozwoju zawodowego,

– zapoznać się z aktualnymi możliwościami współpracy.

Kim jesteśmy – profil KG Legal Kiełtyka Gładkowski

KG Legal Kiełtyka Gładkowski to nowoczesna kancelaria radców prawnych, specjalizująca się w obsłudze klientów biznesowych, w szczególności w obszarach:

– prawa gospodarczego i handlowego,

– obsługi spółek,

– prawa nowych technologii i e-commerce,

– prawa pracy,

– obsługi inwestycji i kontraktów.

Łączymy doświadczenie prawnicze z praktycznym podejściem do biznesu, wspierając zarówno polskie, jak i międzynarodowe podmioty. Stawiamy na rozwój, innowacyjność oraz partnerską współpracę w zespole.

Kogo spotkacie na targach?

Targi Pracy UJ to doskonała okazja do poznania szerokiego spektrum pracodawców. Wśród wystawców znajdą się m.in.: EY, IBM, Google Poland, Accenture, State Street Bank, ABB, HAYS Poland, Lufthansa Group Business Services, Bank Millennium, Zakład Ubezpieczeń Społecznych, Urząd Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów, Ministerstwo Spraw Zagranicznych, World Bank Group oraz wiele innych firm i instytucji.

Kogo szukamy?

Podczas targów będziemy szczególnie zainteresowani poznaniem:

– studentów prawa,

– studentów nowych technologii,

– studentów administracji,

– osób zainteresowanych prawem gospodarczym i obsługą przedsiębiorców,

– kandydatów otwartych na rozwój w dynamicznym środowisku pracy.

Cenimy:

– zaangażowanie i chęć nauki,

– umiejętność analitycznego myślenia,

– dobrą organizację pracy,

– znajomość języków obcych (mile widziany język angielski).

Oferujemy możliwość zdobycia praktycznego doświadczenia, udziału w ciekawych projektach oraz realnego wpływu na rozwój kancelarii.

Do zobaczenia na targach!

Jeśli myślisz o karierze w nowoczesnej kancelarii prawnej i chcesz zdobywać doświadczenie w pracy z biznesem – koniecznie odwiedź nasze stoisko.

26 marca 2026, Auditorium Maximum UJ – czekamy na Ciebie!

Artykuł KG Legal Kiełtyka Gładkowski na Targach Pracy Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego – 26 marca 2026 pochodzi z serwisu KIELTYKA GLADKOWSKI LEGAL | CROSS BORDER POLISH LAW FIRM RANKED IN THE LEGAL 500 EMEA SINCE 2019.

The concept of import tax

According to Article 2, point 7 of the Polish Value Added Tax Act of 11 March 2004, the import of goods should be understood as “the import of goods from a third country into the territory of the European Union.” Generally speaking, import taxes are charged by the customs authority of a given country or region for shipments originating abroad. However, this does not mean that a fee must be paid for every international shipment. Many countries and organizations (primarily the European Union) apply de minimis threshold. This is the minimum order value, determined in a given country, below which import taxes are not charged. For example, in the European Union, pursuant to Article 23, paragraph 1 of Regulation 1186/2009 establishing a Community system of customs duty reliefs, shipments from third countries containing goods of negligible value are exempt from customs duties. According to Article 23, paragraph 2 of that regulation, these goods do not exceed a value of EUR 150 per shipment.

Import tax on works of art in Poland

In our country, from January 1, 1994, to December 31, 1998, the Act of November 25, 1993, on Import Tax on Goods Imported or Shipped from Abroad, was in force. According to Article 5 of this Act, the tax base was the customs value of the goods, increased by the customs duty due, and the tax rate was to be 5% of the tax base; later, this value was reduced to 3%.

Currently, a special import tax applies in Poland to works of art, among other items. Pursuant to Article 120, Section 2 of the Value Added Tax Act (VAT Act), a reduced VAT rate of 7% applies to works of art. Article 120, Section 1, Item 1 of this Act defines works of art in this context as:

a) paintings, collages and similar decorative plaques, drawings and pastels, executed entirely by the artist, excluding plans and drawings for architectural, engineering, industrial, commercial, topographical or similar purposes, hand-decorated artistic craft products, painted fabrics for theatrical scenery, for the decoration of artists’ studios or for similar uses (CN 9701),

b) original engravings, prints and lithographs, produced in limited numbers, in black and white or colour, composed of one or more sheets, executed entirely by the artist, regardless of the process or material used, excluding any mechanical or photomechanical processes (CN 9702),

c) original sculptures and statues in any material, provided they were made entirely by the artist; sculpture casts, the number of which is limited to 8 copies and the execution was supervised by the artist or his heirs (CN 9703),

d) tapestries and wall hangings made by hand based on original designs provided by the artist, provided that their number is limited to 8 copies,

e) photographs taken by the artist, published by him or under his supervision, signed and numbered, limited to 30 copies in all sizes and frames.

In this way, the concept of works of art is distinguished from the concepts of collectors’ items, antiques and used goods, described in the following paragraphs.

However, the Act on Value Added Tax provides for an exception, as pursuant to Article 120, paragraph 4 of the VAT Act, a tax rate of 22% applies to works of art acquired by a given person with the intention of reselling them as part of their business activity.

Major changes to the import tax on works of art have also been introduced from 2025. Previously, it was possible to apply general rules or the so-called “margin procedure,” under which the difference between the sale amount and the purchase amount, reduced by the amount of tax due, was subject to taxation. These changes were already introduced by the Act of November 8, 2024, amending the Act on Value Added Tax and certain other acts implementing the provisions of Article 317 of EU Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax and Directive 2022/542 amending it.

The changes will apply to cases where a taxpayer personally imported these goods or acquired works of art from their creators or their legal successors, or from taxpayers who do not use the margin scheme (Article 120, Section 17 of the VAT Act). In such cases, the margin scheme may only be applied if a reduced rate was not applied to the import or delivery of the works of art.

Also, Article 120, paragraph 15 of this Act introduces the requirement of appropriate records (in accordance with Article 109, paragraph 3) in the event that, in addition to the procedures described in Article 120, paragraphs 4 and 5, the taxpayer also applies general taxation principles; these records should include, among other things, the amount of the purchase of goods necessary to determine the amount of the margin.

It should also be remembered that under Article 120, Section 14 of the VAT Act, a taxpayer may also apply general provisions on taxation to used items, in which case the person will be able to deduct the amount of input tax on these goods for the period in which the taxpayer’s tax liability arose for the supply of these goods.

Judgments and interpretations

According to ruling VIII SA/ Wa 712/22, if goods have already been subject to value added tax upon sale to a consumer who did not benefit from the VAT deduction in the price paid, the subsequent resale of these goods as used may be subject to VAT only to the extent that the taxpayer trades in the acquired goods and generates income from them. Only the VAT taxpayer’s reporting of such turnover, when they acquired used goods on which they were unable to deduct the VAT charged by the seller, entitles the taxpayer to VAT on the margin, which is the difference between the price paid upon purchase of the used goods and the price acquired for the purpose of selling them for consideration to obtain a margin as part of the remuneration for the service.

Under this ruling, the application of Article 120 paragraphs 4 and 10 of the VAT Act (taxation of margins) is not dependent on whether the seller is a taxpayer referred to in Article 15 or whether they are a taxpayer of value added tax. Even if they are such a taxpayer, it is still possible to tax the sales margin on goods purchased from such an entity under the VAT system. According to the court, it is sufficient here that the material conditions listed in the VAT Act are met: the supply concerned tax-exempt activities (after meeting certain conditions) or the supply of goods was tax-exempt to an entrepreneur whose sales value did not exceed PLN 200,000 in either the previous or the current tax year (excluding tax, Article 43 paragraph 1 item 2 and Article 113 of the VAT Act). Moreover, if a domestic buyer purchases goods from an entity that is not a VAT payer, they are not required to have documents confirming the purchase of goods for which the tax base was the margin, which is the difference between the sales amount and the purchase amount, reduced by the amount of tax (Article 120, paragraphs 4 and 5 of the VAT Act). According to the court, it is sufficient to meet the material conditions listed in the VAT Act: the supply concerned tax-exempt activities (after meeting certain conditions) or the supply of goods was tax-exempt to an entrepreneur whose sales value did not exceed PLN 200,000 in either the previous or current tax year (excluding tax, Article 43, paragraph 1, item 2 and Article 113 of the VAT Act). Moreover, if a domestic buyer purchases goods from an entity that is not a VAT payer, he is not obliged to have documents confirming the acquisition of goods for which the tax base was the margin, which was the difference between the sales amount and the purchase amount, reduced by the amount of tax.

Further, in judgment III SA/ Wa 2236/13, the Court agreed with the Director of the Customs Chamber’s argument that the historic coins are collectors’ items because they are not typically used as a means of payment. These coins were issued in small quantities, and the mere fact that they may constitute legal tender does not mean that they are typically used as such. Therefore, these coins are collectors’ items and are not subject to tax exemption under Article 45 paragraph 1 item 8 of the VAT Act. As already mentioned, the Court agreed with this interpretation, but stated that classifying these coins as collectors’ items would also affect the application of Article 120 paragraph 2, and therefore the reduced rate specified in that provision should apply.

The issue of the provisions of Article 120 of the VAT Act is also addressed in Resolution OG/005/177/PP2/443/60/2005 of the Head of the First Tax Office in Kielce dated December 2, 2005. The applicant inquired whether the supply of works of art he had created would be subject to the 7% VAT rate. At the same time, he conducted business activity in the field of advertising services, and for the previous month, he had also run a gallery where he supplied works of art, including those he himself created. The Head agreed with this position, citing Article 120, paragraph 3, item 1, letter a of the VAT Act, according to which: “The 7% tax rate shall also apply to: the supply of works of art by their creator or the creator’s heir (…).”

The problem of understanding the term “artist”, used in art. 120 sec. 1 item 1a of the VAT Act, also in relation to art. 120 sec. 2, was raised in the individual interpretation of 31 December 2008 issued by the Director of the Tax Chamber in Warsaw, reference number IPPP2/443-1597/08-2/KK. The question here, for the purposes of applying the 7% rate to imports, was: “Should the term “artist”, which appears in sec. 1 item 1a of art. 120 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, be understood in the same way as it functions in everyday language, or should the author of a painting, in order to be an artist within the meaning of the Act, meet other conditions, e.g. present some documentation certifying being an artist”? This is related to art. 68 a) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ L 302, 19.10.1992, as amended ), under which customs authorities, in order to verify the accuracy of the data contained in a customs declaration, have the right to request the declarant to present documents other than those annexed to the customs declaration. The Director of the Tax Chamber stated here that all definitions contained in paragraph 1 were created solely for the purposes of chapter 4. He did not agree with the applicant’s point of view that the term “artist” should be understood in its colloquial meaning. Finally, the director stated that the applicant company will have the right to apply the 7% value added tax rate upon import of works of art referred to in Art. 120 paragraph 1 item 1 lit. a of the VAT Act, provided that they are classified under the symbol of the Polish Classification of Products and Services PKWiU 92.31.10-00.1 or PCN 9701 or CN 9701 codes.

Summary

In summary, the current import tax levied on works of art is an exception to the standard VAT rate in Poland. A reduced rate of 7% is applied. Polish regulations in this area, primarily the Value Added Tax Act, are also being aligned with EU regulations, for example, those regarding the “margin procedure.” Given that the aforementioned Act of November 8, 2024, expired on January 26, 2026, it is possible that changes in this regard will occur after that date. However, no specific draft legislation has been prepared at this time.

#VAT
#ImportTax
#TaxLaw
#InternationalTrade
#CustomsLaw
#ArtMarket
#ArtLaw
#EURegulations
#TaxCompliance
#TradeCompliance
#CustomsDuties
#IndirectTax
#ArtBusiness
#GlobalTrade
#PolishLaw

Artykuł Import tax and works of art in Poland pochodzi z serwisu KIELTYKA GLADKOWSKI LEGAL | CROSS BORDER POLISH LAW FIRM RANKED IN THE LEGAL 500 EMEA SINCE 2019.

The U.S. Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) has introduced a new regulation called the 50% Rule, requiring every exporter to verify the ownership of parties to a transaction before shipping products. Previous name verification is no longer sufficient. BIS has expanded its end-user screening regulations to an unprecedented range of (and opaque) product and business relationship categories. If at least 50% of a company’s shares are owned by one or more entities on the BIS List or the Military End-User List (MEU), the company is automatically subject to the same restrictions as the owner. The BIS Entity List includes individuals, businesses, government organizations, and addresses subject to specific licensing requirements for the export, re-export, and transfer of goods within a given country. Previously, entities legally distinct from those on the list were not subject to licensing requirements, and the current expanded list includes thousands of subsidiaries, parent companies, and sister companies. This rule is intended to prevent situations where companies affiliated with sanctioned entities continue to operate freely because they are not named. This regulation is intended to fill a significant gap in the restricted entity lists and strengthen the overall control system in the United States. Furthermore, the introduction of this regulation significantly expands the licensing requirement; a recipient not listed on any of the above lists may still be subject to an export ban. Furthermore, if a company fails to verify the ownership of its contractors, it risks sanctions and loss of export privileges. Current tools are no longer sufficient, and an analysis of the ownership structure has become necessary. This regulation is similar to the 50% Rule of the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). BIS also introduced a new “red flag”: if there’s uncertainty about a potential counterparty’s ownership structure, the transaction cannot proceed without additional verification or licensing. This requires firms to obtain ownership information, document their arrangements, and halt the transaction if there’s a lack of transparency.

There are companies and analytic firms that help various businesses and institutions identify connections between entities to prevent business risks or other regulatory violations. They enable clients to uncover hidden connections between entities and meet stringent regulatory accountability standards. They verify compliance with the BIS SO rule, thus including the same comprehensive data on ownership, methodology, and shareholder percentages. By leveraging corporate data from around the world, this model protects against potential regulatory risk and also provides immediate reach, flexible integration, and a proven methodology. It also checks entities against sanctions lists imposed by the United States, European Union countries or the United Kingdom, automatically marking those subject to sanctions and companies associated with them.

The process that takes place thanks to the solutions used by can be described in 4 stages:

– Collecting billions of documents from multiple databases (various types of company registers, customs and trade registers)

– Data analysis by the system, identification of names and combining information about the same people or companies

– Building graphical maps of relationships between entities, showing their connections: financial, ownership or transactional

– Detection of potential risks by the system: connections with sanctioned companies, money laundering risks, corruption, hidden ownership links and conflicts of interest.

In this way, there is possible rapid detection of complex and hidden connections between different business entities and risks, based on the largest databases commercially available.

In addition to using the above solutions, there are provided recommendations to clients, which can be defined in the following few steps:

– building a complete picture of the ownership of all trading partners

– identification of connections with sanctions lists

– aggregating the shares of individual owners to calculate the overall percentage

– verification if any of the owners have strict restrictions, then they will apply

– carrying out documentation of the entire process

– mapping: all entities

– updating various types of compliance systems

– implementation of tools for analyzing the ownership structure.

#ExportCompliance

#BISRegulations

#SanctionsCompliance

#TradeCompliance

#ExportControls

#DueDiligence

#OwnershipStructure

#RegulatoryCompliance

#RiskManagement

#GlobalTrade

#SupplyChainCompliance

#SanctionsScreening

#CorporateTransparency

#ComplianceStrategy

#BusinessRisk

Artykuł BIS 50% rule – what it means for cross border business pochodzi z serwisu KIELTYKA GLADKOWSKI LEGAL | CROSS BORDER POLISH LAW FIRM RANKED IN THE LEGAL 500 EMEA SINCE 2019.