Publication date: May 13, 2026
The most significant changes that influence litigations in Poland will come into force on March 1, 2026. The amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure concern, among other things, powers of attorney, mediation, the computerization of civil proceedings (this element predominates in the amending act), and new rules for service of documents. Many changes concern the use of an information portal in the proceedings, which is also the subject of an amendment to the Act on the System of Common Courts.
The amendment aims to be one of the first steps towards computerizing the entire justice system to meet the needs of the information society. Furthermore, the justification also includes intentions to standardize the use of IT systems across courts, eliminating differences, for example, between different divisions of common courts. For the time being, after all the changes contained in the amending act enter into force, documents filed via the Information Portal will still need to be printed for inclusion in the case file due to the lack of digital records in civil proceedings. However, this is only a temporary solution, as work on digital records is already underway. The legislative authority also emphasizes the importance of gradual implementation and development, so that judges and citizens have an appropriate transitional period to become familiar with these systems.
The Act Amending the Code of Civil Procedure, the Civil Code, and Certain Other Acts introduces the most numerous changes to civil procedure, which are immediately apparent upon first glance, even without reading the entire text. Some of these changes take effect almost immediately, while others will remain in the vacatio legis period for up to a year. Article 12 of the Act establishes a presumption that all amendments will enter into force on March 1, 2026, but provides numerous exceptions to this rule. This provision establishes, in essence, five different effective dates for the new provisions in sections 1-4, and provides the main date mentioned earlier. These dates are March 1, 2027 (within the specified scope), September 10, 2025, June 1, 2026, and November 27, 2025.
The justification for the act also mentions another reason for its creation: the development of the Common Courts Information Portal. The text notes that initially, communication was only possible unilaterally, meaning courts served documents if they had an electronic version of the document being served. However, work on this portal has now enabled two-way electronic communication, which should be utilized to expedite and facilitate civil proceedings. As can be seen, the amending act aims to adapt institutions to technological advances and increasingly new solutions.
The legislator considered it justified to introduce certain transitional periods for the entry into force of new provisions and subjective and objective restrictions.
The first draft regulations requiring discussion are intended to address service. It is recommended that provisions be introduced to regulate this issue, ensuring that service is legally effective only in situations specifically provided for by law. In other words, the possibility of service via the Information Portal will only be effective if the type of document, situation, and circumstances correspond to the provisions in the given case that allow for service in this particular manner. It seems reasonable to specify the moment of service in this manner to avoid procedural problems during civil proceedings. According to the proposed Articles 125 § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure in conjunction with Article 165 § 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the conditions for legally effective service are first to post the document in electronic form on the Information Portal of Common Courts, and then the court delivers to the sender a document confirming receipt of the document in this form.
In terms of service, it seems a good idea to first require professionals to serve documents using the discussed system, as these individuals are more familiar with the current functioning of the justice system and procedures, and therefore, it will be easier for them to familiarize themselves with these new regulations and the resulting solutions. Many professionals have undoubtedly already had frequent contact with the Information Portal of Common Courts in connection with serving their clients and other activities related to the practice of law. This scope of service is intended to cover attorneys, legal counselors, patent attorneys, the General Counsel to the Republic of Poland, and prosecutors (proposed Art. 125 1 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure). Therefore, if the provision stipulates that delivery of a document via an electronic system is not possible, the document should be submitted via the Information Portal for the service to be legally effective.
In terms of the subject matter limitation, i.e. the indication of documents that will initially be served through the Common Courts Information Portal system, these are notifications of termination of a power of attorney, notifications referred to in Article 136 § 1, 4 and 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 387 1 § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, declarations regarding consent to mediation, requests to conduct a remote hearing, appeals, complaints, complaints against a court registrar’s ruling, procedural documents in the course of proceedings resulting from the filing of an appeal, appeal, or complaint against a court registrar’s ruling, requests for service of a judgment together with a justification issued as a result of the examination of an appeal, appeal, or complaint against a court registrar’s ruling, as well as documents supplementing formal deficiencies of such requests. Submitting documents outside this subject matter scope will, however, result in the ineffectiveness of service of the documents in question pursuant to Article 125 3 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which the chairman will be obliged to notify the person submitting the document in violation of the above-mentioned rules.
The obligation for the above-mentioned professional entities is to take effect after a one-year transitional period, during which future parties required to submit documents via the Information Portal will have the option to choose whether to submit the indicated document in writing or through the Portal. However, after this period, the submission of specifically designated documents will be mandatory (Article 125 1 § 2). According to the legislator, this solution is necessary to ensure a compromise between streamlining civil proceedings and the well-being of the parties, as well as the regularity and stability of the proceedings.
The draft act also provides that it will not be possible to send documents via the Information Portal within a given type of proceedings, namely when filing documents before the Supreme Court (which does not use IT solutions) and within land and mortgage register and registration proceedings (Article 125 1 § 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 511 1b of the Code of Civil Procedure).
The provisions of the amending act also address the limitations of the Common Courts Information Portal by introducing a specific exemption from the obligation to submit certain categories of documents through this IT system that, due to their technical parameters, are currently unsuitable for submission in this manner. These include, for example, attachments with excessive memory requirements, pursuant to the proposed Article 125 § 2 § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. A list of such documents will be specified, among other things, in a regulation issued pursuant to the statutory authorization in Article 125 § 4. Documents in formats not supported by the information portal, when their content cannot be converted to formats permitted by the regulation, attachments that cannot be digitized (e.g., material samples in cases involving product defects), and attachments whose legible digitization would require the contracting authority to acquire specialized office equipment (e.g., large-format documents), will also be listed.
Furthermore, it is necessary to discuss Article 125 § 2 and § 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which introduces certain guarantees for parties and their representatives in the event of a failure or maintenance work on the Information Portal, as well as other reasons for the inability to serve a document that are not the fault of the parties. The essence of the guarantees introduced by this provision is that if the court’s inability to file a document occurs on the last day of the deadline for a given procedural act, the deadline will be extended until the end of the next business day after the day on which the restrictions cease. This rule, it’s worth noting, will apply on that last day for the act regardless of when the obstacles arise. This legislative approach is intended to prevent an excessive number of requests for extension of the deadline, which would result in a slowdown in entire civil proceedings, and to alleviate the need for constant monitoring of the system’s proper operation and the rush associated with filing documents. In connection with the discussion of this draft provision, it should also be noted that there will be an obligation to substantiate the circumstances preventing the submission of a document via the Portal and the authority of the presiding judge to return the document, and the court to reject the document, in the event of failure to comply with this obligation by the attorney-in-fact.
Professional representatives (lawyers, legal advisors, and patent attorneys) registered in the ROBUS system (Register of Persons Taking Part in Court Proceedings) will also be required to include their number on the appropriate list in their power of attorney. This will, of course, no longer be necessary in subsequent submissions.
Further regulations also include changes to the designation of ex officio legal aid. The court will now be able to forward applications to regional legal counsel and bar associations through the Information Portal system, thereby communicating with these organizations.
The proposed Article 128, paragraph 2, of the Code of Civil Procedure also provides for the possibility of attaching copies of attachments to a document along with the document itself via the Information Portal. However, the certification of attachments will be optional, not mandatory, due to the fact that the party submitting the document may not always be able to do so.
Regarding attorneys, another change will be the ability for professional attorneys to electronically certify documents in an IT system or information portal (Article 129, Section 2). This is intended to simplify the process of certifying not only documents but also attachments for attorneys, as under current law, document certification currently occurs when a document is entered into the IT system. This may cause attorneys to have difficulty using attachments if they do not have the originals. Regarding issues related to original documents, changes are also introduced by Article 128, Section 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which regulates situations in which the original document must be submitted in written form. This change is intended to eliminate doubts about whether such a requirement should be considered obvious, or whether, for example, a scan of the document should be submitted despite the lack of such a regulation. However, the legislator introduces an exception to the requirement to submit documents via the Information Portal and requires that the document be submitted directly to the court in this required form, bypassing the technological process.
The amended Article 131 1a § 1 expands the list of entities to which the court will be obliged to deliver correspondence via the Information Portal to include court bailiffs and permanent mediators.
Significant changes are also to be introduced under the amending act regarding mediation. From the entry into force of the regulations, in certain categories of cases (commercial cases, construction contracts, and contracts closely related to the construction process for the performance of construction works), the court will refer the parties to a dispute to mediation before the first scheduled hearing. This is intended to promote mediation as a peaceful, effective method that ensures the implementation of agreements within its scope, and relieves courts of the burden of resolving disputes between the parties despite the possibility of reaching an agreement. As indicated in the explanatory memorandum, these changes will incorporate the principle of voluntary mediation by allowing a party to file an objection in the first procedural document following the referral to mediation. This objection will have the effect of relieving the court from referring the dispute to mediation for resolution. It should be noted that, in addition to defining specific categories of cases referred ex officio to mediation, the legislator also specifies that proceedings will be conducted in the types specified in the Act (i.e., cases heard in writ-of-payment proceedings, electronic writ-of-payment proceedings, and payment order proceedings, unless an objection or objection to a payment order has been filed). Court registrars will also be able to issue orders to refer a case to mediation pursuant to the added Article 183 8 § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, second sentence. Furthermore, another measure will be introduced in the field of mediation, aimed at increasing the number of cases referred to mediation: the absence of a position regarding a decision to refer a case to mediation will not be treated as an objection to such a decision, but as implied consent. The deadline for taking such a position will be one week. Furthermore, the competent court, regardless of subject matter jurisdiction, will be the district court for approving the settlement. A similar solution is provided for agreements to refer a case to mediation. The bill also stipulates that if the settlement concerns claims covered by different court proceedings, the parties are required to list these proceedings in the settlement and designate the court that will conduct the settlement approval proceedings. If courts of different levels have jurisdiction, the case will be heard by a higher court. Furthermore, the above changes will introduce the possibility of court approval of a mediation settlement at a remote hearing without the parties’ signatures.
From March 1, 2026, Poland’s civil procedure enters a new era of digital-first justice — with sweeping reforms to electronic service of documents, electronic powers of attorney, and the expanded use of the Common Courts Information Portal.
This is not just a technical update. It’s a structural transformation of how litigation will function in practice.
Key changes include:
While paper files still remain for now, the direction is clear: Poland is moving toward a fully digital civil justice system, with standardised IT infrastructure across courts.
For practitioners, this means one thing — adaptation is no longer optional.
PolandLaw #CivilProcedure #Litigation #LegalTech #LawReform #DigitalJustice #EJustice #CourtProcedure #LegalInnovation #LawyersOfLinkedIn #AttorneyLife #LegalProfession #CourtSystem #ProceduralLaw #ElectronicService #EFililing #DigitalTransformation #LawAndTechnology #Compliance #Regulation #Mediation #DisputeResolution #PowerOfAttorney #LegalUpdates #FutureOfLaw