INTRODUCTION

METHODOLOGY OF THE RESEARCH

This report is the result of research into the application of four EU Regulations, involving an analysis of case law and interviews with judges and legal practitioners. The researchers analysed 57 court decisions (judgments and orders) issued by common courts (district courts, regional courts and courts of appeal), the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Tribunal found in publicly available databases. The split according to the relevant EU regulation was as follows:

• – European Enforcement Order: 18

• – European Order for Payment: 30

• – European Small Claims Procedure: 7

• – European Account Preservation Order: 2

Eleven interviews were carried out as part of the project: seven with law practitioners, two with a judge, and two with representatives of consumer organisations. Generally, participants had wide practical experience, but only one participant had any experience with the EAPO.

OVERVIEW OF NATIONAL RULES

EU regulations are directly binding but do not regulate all procedural issues. In Poland, the proceedings based on analysed regulations are thus partly regulated in Act of 17 November 1964 of the Code of Civil Procedure (k.p.c.).

• – European Enforcement Order: Article 7951–7955 k.p.c.

• – European Order for Payment: Articles 50515–50520 and 7956–7957 k.p.c.

• – European Small Claims Procedure: Articles 50521–50527a and 7958–7959 k.p.c.

• – European Account Preservation Order: Article 11443–114413 k.p.c.

In Poland, there is no centralised jurisdiction for applying the analysed Regulations.

PERVASIVE PROBLEMS

AWARENESS OF REGULATIONS

Awareness in General

The interviews were conducted with lawyers – advocates and attorneys-at-law – specialising in cross-border litigation. Among them, there is high awareness of the existence of European instruments. The interviewees realise that they can choose from both European and national instruments and make procedural decisions depending on the factual background. Outside of this group, the awareness of the existence of European instruments is much lower.

The vast majority of cases in which the Regulations are used is between businesses. Lawyer 4 noted that it is worth mentioning that entrepreneurs are almost always represented by a proxy, even though there is no such requirement in the Regulations. Lawyers agree that in these cases, business entities are usually in the form of a limited liability company, and they are mostly small and medium-sized enterprises.