Scope of amendments — Preliminary remarks
From 1.3.2027 mandatoryly and from 1.3.2026 optionally, professional attorneys will submit through the information portal certain types of procedural documents, in peculiar means of appeal (appeal, complaint and complaint against the decision of the judicial referee). However, the scope will be comparatively narrow – the portal's submission of letters has been limited by the legislator in both the case and the case.
The subject limitation is that only professional attorneys – attorney, legal counsel, patent attorney, lawyer General of the Republic of Poland and prosecutor will be allowed to submit letters through the information portal. Pages acting personally (and besides represented by non-professional agents) will not be able to usage the anticipation of writing through the portal – even optionally.
As regards the restrictions in question, they are expressed in Article 1251 § 1 of the NPC and are of 2 character. Firstly, letters via the information portal shall not be made available in those proceedings where electronic systems have been made available specifically to them. This presently applies to registration, insolvency and restructuring proceedings (National Debt Register) and electronic registrar proceedings. In these categories of cases, procedural letters are filed through the applicable information system, which excludes the anticipation of utilizing the portal.
Secondly, pursuant to Article 1251 § 1 of the NPC, a procedural paper shall be lodged through the information portal only if ‘if the peculiar provision so provides’. The amendment of 5.8.2025 introduced respective specified provisions.
Catalogue of procedural papers to be submitted by the portal
Article 125 is most important1 § 2 of the KPC, which lists 10 categories of procedural papers that will be able to be filed from 1.3.2026 and will should be filed by professional representatives through the information portal from 1.3.2027. This catalog is random and inconsistent. This is due to the fact that the draft amendment in its first wording provided for only appeals and complaints and procedural writings at second instance. In the course of legislative work, a number of categories of procedural papers to be submitted by the portal were added at first instance (e.g. termination of the procedural mandate or request for service of a reasoned ruling). Consequently, the explanation of Article 1251 § 2 KPC – and at least any of its 10 points – will face serious difficulties.
It is not clear how to interpret the wording utilized in paragraph 1 as ‘submission’. The view is outweighed by the fact that this means a letter together with which the proxy established in the course of the proceedings submits a procedural power of attorney. However, isolated views are besides expressed that this regulation includes the submission of a non-trial associate (Article 510 KC). However, there is no uncertainty that the provisions on the submission of letters by the information portal pursuant to the mention under Article 13(2) of the NPC are applicable in the non-process procedure, excluding perpetual and registered cases (Article 5111b KPC).
Point 4 provides that a message of consent for mediation is to be made by the portal. There should be no uncertainty that this besides includes opposition to the referral of the court to mediation which, in accordance with the amended Article 1838 Paragraph 2 of the KPC must be clear.
The origin of serious doubts will be point 8 providing that a request for service of the judgement is made through the information portal, together with a justification, ‘as well as a letter supplementing the formal deficiencies of specified a request’. It should be noted that at another points Article 1251 § 2 of the NPC does not supply that the portal is besides subject to letters supplementing the shortcomings of the documents. It is not clear, therefore, whether it will should be made through the information portal, e.g. a letter supplementing the shortcomings of the message on the consent to mediation.
The apparent mistake is set out in point 9, according to which applications for a declaration of enforceability of the instruments referred to in Article 777(1) and (1) shall be lodged by the portal.1It’s okay. ” The problem is that Article 777 KPC does not have a §11. It must have been the intention of the task promoter that, through the information portal, applications for a declaration of enforceability should be submitted only to the enforcement titles of the court referred to in Article 777(1) and (1)1. However, the wording of the provision is decided and applications for enforceability by the portal shall be submitted to all the enforcement titles referred to in Article 777(1) of the NPC, including notarial acts involving submission to execution. Only applications for the alleged constitutional feasibility clauses, explicitly mentioned in point 9, were explicitly excluded from the portal.
For the degree to which the information portal may be utilized for the submission of procedural documents, points 6 and 7 of Article 125 are decisive.1 § 2 KPC. These include an appeal, a complaint and a complaint against the decision of the judicial referendarer, as well as procedural letters in the course of the proceedings brought by them. 3 reservations should be made in this respect.
Firstly, complaints to the ultimate Court were excluded from writing through the portal. This is simply a consequence of the general regulation of Article 1251 §3 of the KPC, according to which the anticipation of utilizing the portal does not include procedural papers brought to the ultimate Court.
Secondly, there may be doubts as to whether the category of pleadings ‘in the course of proceedings brought’ by bringing an appeal, in peculiar an appeal, covers only preparatory (substantial) letters, or all letters lodged in the secondary proceedings. There is more support for the adoption of the second of these options, but this would mean that the application by the portal is subject, for example, to an application for the exclusion of a justice at second instance, while the same application at first instance must be submitted on paper.
Third, the request to reconstruct the deadline was not included in the letters to be submitted via the information portal. If it concerns, for example, an appeal or a complaint, it should be filed by the portal, as provided for in Article 169(3) of the NPC, at the same time as the request, the organization should carry out a procedural action.
Proceedings referred to in Article 1251 § 2 of the NPC will be subject to compulsory submission by professional agents through the information portal from 1.3.2027. Earlier in the year (i.e. 1.3.2026) this will be optional. Importantly, at this time the optionality will be full; even in the same case, the professional typical shall have 1 letter referred to in Article 1251 § 2 KPC will be able to bring through the portal and the next – paper.
A second peculiar provision within the meaning of Article 1251 Paragraph 1 of the NPC, which provides for the submission of a circumstantial category of procedural papers by the portal, is Article 18313 § 12, according to which in the procedure for the approval of the settlement concluded in the framework of mediation conducted on the basis of a mediation agreement, lawyer, patent attorney, lawyer General of the Republic of Poland, or prosecutor, makes an application and further pleadings through the information portal. Importantly, the submission of applications for approval of a contractual mediation agreement will be mandatory for professional agents from 1 March 2026 without an yearly transitional period.
The anticipation of submitting certain letters through the portal besides provides for the Act on the lawyer General of the Republic of Poland. This shall apply to notifications of transfer or acquisition of replacement by that institution. Interestingly, in this respect, the usage of the portal is to be optional without any time limit, besides after 1.3.2027.
Writing through the portal – an chance for everyone
A change which is not seen, namely the beginning of the portal to websites acting personally (without professional representatives), may be crucial in practice. As of 1.6.2026, any specified individual will be able to choose to service his or her judicial papers through the portal. However, this will be a one-way option; only professional representatives will inactive be able to submit letters through the portal.
Pursuant to the fresh Article 1311 § 11, a message of the choice of service of letters from the court via a portal or a message of resignation from them shall be made by the website and shall bear a qualified electronic signature, trusted signature or individual signature. A declaration of resignation from this method of service may besides be made in writing by the party.
If the organization conducts respective proceedings, it will be able to choose to service the papers through the portal in any of them and to stay in the remaining paper service.
Summary
Allowing professional attorneys to submit certain procedural papers through the information portal is an crucial step towards the computerisation of civilian proceedings. Unfortunately, the fresh regulations are overly causist and inconsistent.
The next step should be to make it possible for the portal to bring lawsuits, respond to a suit and prepare papers at first instance. However, this does not seem possible without the introduction of electronic files.
A separate problem is that if on 1 side there is simply a professional typical and on the another side there is simply a individual representative, for the another side the court will gotta print letters submitted by a professional typical in electronic form. This will not be a major applicable problem for the letters referred to in Article 1251 §2 of the NPC, including appeals and replies to it, as they are not usually accompanied by many annexes. It will so not be unduly burdensome to print these letters (in electronic form by a legal advisor or lawyer) in order to service the opposing organization if it acts without a professional representative. However, it is hard to imagine imposing specified an work on courts in the case of a suit or a consequence to a lawsuit, which is frequently accompanied by many and very extended annexes.
