Publication date: February 6, 2026
In cross-border trade, businesses often opt for alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods, such as international arbitration. This solution ensures, above all, a more neutral, faster, more flexible, and highly professional procedure. Naturally, in such a situation, the parties do not want to be at the mercy of a domestic court, foreign laws, unfamiliar traditions, doctrines, and established interpretations. Hence the need to submit the dispute to resolution by one or more arbitrators appointed by the parties from among global experts in their respective fields of business. The fundamental condition for such a solution is an arbitration agreement (the terms “arbitration court” and “arbitral tribunal” are often used interchangeably and refer to the same body resolving disputes through arbitration), included either in the initial agreement or in a separate agreement between the parties, which specifies the legal relationship from which the dispute arises or may arise. Obtaining an arbitration award does not, however, definitively conclude the case, but rather initiates the sometimes problematic issue of enforcing such an award in domestic courts. A foreign creditor who obtains an arbitration award that obligates a Polish entity to pay can generally expect its recognition and enforcement in a Polish domestic court.
The legal basis for enforcing foreign arbitration awards
Following appropriate proceedings, arbitration awards may be enforced in Poland in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, but also in accordance with the provisions of the New York Convention (i.e., the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, signed in New York in 1958[1]), provided that the creditor seeks enforcement of an arbitration award issued in a state that is a signatory to the convention[2]. The provisions of an international agreement will be applied with priority over the provisions of domestic law – the Code of Civil Procedure. This stems from Article 91, Section 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which states that an international agreement ratified with consent expressed by statute takes precedence over domestic law, meaning that the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure will apply to matters not regulated by the convention. This is primarily the case for proceedings for the recognition or recognition of a court judgment. Currently, over 166 countries worldwide are parties to the convention, making it by far the most important document in international arbitration. The scope of this analysis is limited to arbitral awards originating from states that are parties to the 1958 New York Convention, which constitute the vast majority of cases in international trade. Issues related to the recognition of awards from states that are not bound by the Convention are beyond the scope of this study.
Obtaining a judgment on the recognition or establishment of an arbitration award issued abroad
The first step is to file an application, which requires active legitimacy from the party to the arbitration proceedings and its legal successors (the status of a party and legal succession should be assessed according to the law of the country of origin of the award[3]). Passive legitimacy is exercised by the entity against which the applicant may invoke the arbitration award for enforcement purposes[4]. The application must meet the requirements for a procedural document. It is crucial to file the application with the court that has jurisdiction to hear it. The provisions of the New York Convention do not regulate the jurisdiction of a court to recognize or enforce a foreign arbitration award. Under Article 1213 1 § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the competent court in proceedings for recognition or enforcement of a settlement concluded before such a court is the court of appeal in whose jurisdiction the state court that would have had jurisdiction to hear the case if the parties had not made an arbitration agreement is located, and in the absence of such a basis – the Court of Appeal in Warsaw. Next, the key issue is the fulfillment of formal requirements. As Article IV, paragraph 1 of the New York Convention states – “In order to obtain recognition and enforceability, the party seeking recognition and enforcement shall submit, together with the request:
a) A duly legalized original of the judgment or a duly certified copy of such a document,
b) The original of the contract referred to in Article II or a duly certified copy thereof.”
A translation of these documents into Polish, certified by an official or sworn translator, or a diplomatic or consular representative, must also be attached, unless they were prepared in Polish. Obtaining these documents is generally accomplished through the arbitration tribunals selected by the parties; the rules of the relevant arbitration institution provide essential assistance in this regard. For example, the Rules of the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris, one of the most prestigious arbitration tribunals, in Article 35.2, regulate the issue of obtaining copies, certifications of conformity to the original issued by the Secretary General, and the issue of making these documents available upon request by the parties. Furthermore, the original of each award issued in accordance with the Rules shall be deposited with the Secretariat, which, together with the Arbitral Tribunal, shall assist the parties in taking further steps[5].
In accordance with the view expressed by the Supreme Court, submission of the above-mentioned original judgment or a duly certified copy thereof constitutes a formal requirement of the application, but is also a substantive condition for its granting. Failure to attach such documents will result in the application being dismissed.
The reference to Article II of the Convention clarifies that the term “written agreement” also includes an arbitration clause contained in a contract. Arbitral tribunals often include in their rules proposals for model arbitration clauses, the use of which is left to the parties’ discretion, but as a precautionary measure, it is advisable to adhere to them. For example, the aforementioned ICC in Paris includes the following proposal in its rules:
“Any dispute arising out of or in connection with this Agreement shall be finally settled under the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) by one or more arbitrators appointed in accordance with such Rules.”
The parties are of course free to shape the content of this clause, for example in matters of determining the seat or language of the arbitration, but it is advisable to avoid unclear wording that causes uncertainty and delays and may hinder or even jeopardise the dispute resolution process.
The Polish court first examines its jurisdiction and the formal requirements of the application. If formal deficiencies are found, it is obligated to summon the party to supplement them. If the application meets all formal requirements, it is scheduled for a hearing. When referring the application to a hearing, the presiding judge orders a copy of the application to be served on the opposing party, who, within two weeks of service of the copy of the application, may file a response to the application pursuant to Article 1213 1 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure and allege, among other things, the existence of obstacles to recognition or enforcement. Referring to Article V of the New York Convention, which applies to judgments issued in signatory states, these are:
1) lack of legal capacity of the parties, lack of a valid arbitration agreement;
2) improper notification of the appointment of an arbitrator, of the proceedings before the arbitration court or otherwise the party was deprived of the opportunity to defend its rights before the arbitration court (violation of the principle of equality of the parties and the principle of adversarial proceedings);
3) the arbitration award concerns a dispute not covered by the arbitration agreement or exceeds the scope of such an agreement; however, if the decision on matters covered by the arbitration agreement can be separated from the decision on matters not covered by the agreement or exceeding its scope, the refusal to recognize or enforce the arbitration award may only concern matters not covered by the agreement or exceeding its scope;
4) the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the proceedings before that tribunal were not in accordance with the agreement of the parties or – in the absence of an agreement in this respect – were not in accordance with the law of the country in which the proceedings before the arbitral tribunal were conducted;
5) the arbitration award has not yet become binding on the parties or has been set aside or its enforcement has been suspended by a court of the state in which or under the law of which the award was issued.
According to the Supreme Court, proceedings concerning domestic judgments (settlement agreements) are of a narrower, ancillary nature and do not include an examination of the case on the merits, while proceedings concerning foreign judgments (settlement agreements) are proceedings with a broad scope of review, which results from a significantly expanded list of negative grounds (Article 1215 § 2), and which is reflected in the obligation to hold a hearing (Article 1215 § 1) and a different procedure for appealing against decisions issued in these proceedings (Article 1215 § 3). Article 1214 § 1–3 also applies to proceedings on an application for recognition or enforcement of a foreign arbitration award (settlement agreement). Article 1215 provides for certain differences. In the case of judgments issued in New York Convention countries, the norm of Article V § 2 will apply. Therefore, the court also takes into account ex officio that under Polish law the subject matter of the dispute cannot be resolved by arbitration, or that the recognition or enforcement of the judgment would be contrary to the public policy of that State.
However, it does not assess the validity of the award in any way, meaning it does not know whether the arbitral tribunal’s ruling is correct. Therefore, the substantive review of an arbitral award is limited solely to assessing whether the award in question violates fundamental legal norms. A typical violation of the Polish legal order clause is a lack of impartiality on the part of the arbitral tribunal, which, however, is extremely rare in renowned arbitral tribunals such as the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris or other arbitration centers around the world.
Appeals court ruling on the enforcement of an arbitration award issued abroad is final and enforceable upon issuance. The only appeal is by filing an extraordinary appeal. A final declaration of enforceability of an arbitration award and the issuance of an enforcement clause entitle the creditor to file a motion to initiate and conduct enforcement proceedings by a court bailiff.
The proceedings for the recognition of an arbitration award and the issuance of an enforcement clause for such an award, pursuant to Article 1214 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, have been consolidated. When establishing enforceability, the court does not issue a separate ruling, but rather issues an enforcement clause for the award, also assessing whether the conditions specified in the provisions on enforcement clause proceedings are met, in particular whether the award is actually capable of being enforced through enforcement. The thus recognized award, together with the enforcement clause, constitutes an enforcement title that must be submitted to the enforcement authority.
In practice, the greatest obstacle and challenge to establishing enforceability is the challenge of an arbitration clause or arbitration agreement being invalidated by a litigant. In this respect, the agreement itself will be scrutinized for both its content and form. The necessary conditions for the clause are:
1) Indication of the subject of the dispute or the legal relationship from which the dispute has arisen or may arise
2) Consideration of the principle of equality of the parties. Provisions of the agreement, in particular those authorizing only one party to bring an action before an arbitration court, are ineffective.
3) Conclusion of the contract in writing, although, as mentioned above, an exchange of declarations by e-mail is permissible.
An overly succinct definition of the source of the dispute, i.e., the legal relationship from which it is intended to arise—will be grounds for declaring the clause invalid. Typically, the provision “The parties shall submit to arbitration all disputes that may arise between them in the future” does not meet these requirements. It is important to specify what the dispute arises from or what it may arise from—for this purpose, it would be better to write, for example, “The parties shall submit to arbitration all disputes arising from the agreement.” Alternatively, it could be overly specific and specify that arbitration will cover disputes arising during the term of the agreement and arising therefrom, and in this case, claims arising after the termination of the contractual relationship.
Importantly, as the Supreme Court notes in its Resolution of 13 September 2012, Case V CSK 323/11[6], one should agree with the views of foreign legal scholars, which strongly support the view that a party that has engaged in a substantive dispute before an arbitration court without raising the court’s lack of jurisdiction (e.g., due to the ineffectiveness or invalidity of the arbitration clause) loses this defense in proceedings seeking recognition or enforcement of the arbitration award before a domestic court. This argument is valid in light of the essence of the New York Convention, which requires the parties to act in accordance with the principles of good faith and good practice, and therefore prohibits acts contrary to these principles. Adopting this interpretation effectively prevents acts that are disloyal to the other participants and the arbitration court, resulting in unnecessary costs and wasted time.
The ineffectiveness of the provisions of an arbitration agreement due to a violation of the principle of equality of the parties should be addressed to the content of the arbitration agreement itself, not to the general rules governing the operation of a permanent court of arbitration[7]. In particular, provisions authorizing only one party to bring an action before the arbitration court specified in the agreement or before a court have been deemed to violate this principle. A violation of the principle of equality of the parties results in the ineffectiveness of that provision. However, if the content of the agreement indicates that without the provisions violating the principle of equality, the parties would not have concluded an agreement to submit their dispute to arbitration, this will result in the ineffectiveness of the entire arbitration agreement.
Regarding form, it should be noted that when applying the provisions of the New York Convention, due to the seat of the foreign arbitration court (i.e., depending on whether that country is a party to the convention), it is necessary to interpret Article II, paragraph 2, and Article IV of the convention. In light of these provisions, along with the provisions of domestic law, it must be recognized that an additional agreement may be concluded in writing, but an exchange of letters or telegrams is also permissible. Domestic law, specifically Article 1162, paragraph 2, confirms this regulation and simultaneously liberalizes the interpretation of Article II, paragraph 2, by permitting the conclusion of such an agreement through the exchange of declarations made via means of distance communication that allow for the recording of their content (e.g., email) without the necessary signatures of the parties. Article IV of the convention is derivative in nature, and the requirement to present the original of the agreement referred to in Article II should be considered in light of the form in which the agreement may have been concluded.
In summary, the procedure for recognizing and enforcing a foreign arbitral award in Poland, although based on a relatively transparent legal framework—in particular, the New York Convention and domestic law—can face significant challenges in practice. Both formal issues and compliance with public policy principles, as well as the validity of the arbitration agreement itself, are crucial. A foreign creditor seeking to enforce an arbitral award against a Polish debtor, requires not only careful preparation of the application but also knowledge of the realities of proceedings before domestic courts. Ultimately, however, the Polish legal system—through its implementation of international standards—provides effective tools for enforcing foreign arbitral awards, making Poland a country favorable to international arbitration.
[1] Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, signed in New York on 10 June 1958 (Journal of Laws of 1962, No. 9, item 41).
[2] Resolution of the Supreme Court of 13 September 2012, V CSK 323/11, OSNC 2013, No. 4, item 52.
[3] Bełczącki Robert Marek, Initiation of proceedings for recognition or enforcement of a foreign arbitration award under the New York Convention.
[4] see Supreme Court decision of 17 July 2007, III CZP 55/07, OSNC 2008, No. 9, item 106, LEX No. 320099.
[5] ICC Arbitration Rules https://www.iccpolska.pl
[6] Resolution of the Supreme Court of 13 September 2012, V CSK 323/11, OSNC 2013, No. 4, item 52.
[7] Resolution of the Supreme Court of 19 October 2012, V CSK 503/11, LEX No. 1254742.