How to Enforce a Foreign Arbitral Award in Poland, Practical Guide for 2026

Last updated: 30 May 2026

Poland is one of the most reliable jurisdictions in Central Europe for creditors seeking to enforce a foreign arbitral award. The country has been a signatory to the 1958 New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards since 1961, and its domestic framework, Part 5, Title VIII of the Polish Code of Civil Procedure (CCP), closely mirrors the Convention’s pro-enforcement bias. Recent reforms to the CCP and a string of Supreme Court decisions handed down between 2024 and 2026 have tightened procedural requirements in some areas while streamlining timelines in others, making it essential for foreign creditors to understand the current landscape before filing.

This guide sets out every step required to enforce a foreign arbitral award in Poland, from the initial petition through to seizure of assets, with sector-specific tactics for construction and sports disputes.

Quick Answer, Can You Enforce a Foreign Arbitral Award in Poland?

Yes. A foreign creditor who holds a binding arbitral award against a Polish entity, or against any party with assets in Poland, can generally expect recognition and enforcement through a Polish domestic court. Poland’s obligations under the New York Convention, combined with Part 5, Title VIII of the CCP, create a presumption in favour of enforcement. The court will not re-examine the merits of the underlying dispute; its review is limited to the narrow procedural and public-policy grounds listed in the Convention and mirrored in the CCP.

That said, enforcement is not automatic. The creditor must file a formal petition, submit prescribed documents, and overcome any objections raised by the debtor. Industry observers expect that, following the 2024–2026 reforms, Polish courts will continue their broadly arbitration-friendly posture, data from the Wolters Kluwer Arbitration Blog shows that awards were set aside or refused enforcement in only a relatively small number of the more than 200 post-award proceedings reviewed across 2021–2022. The likely practical effect of the newer reforms is an even more efficient process, provided applicants comply with the updated formal requirements from the outset.

Legal Framework Governing Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards in Poland

Understanding the layered legal framework is the first step to building a successful enforcement strategy. Three pillars govern how foreign arbitral awards are treated in Polish courts.

The New York Convention and Its Domestic Implementation

Poland ratified the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 1958) in 1961. The Convention obliges Polish courts to recognise and enforce arbitral awards rendered in the territory of any other contracting state, subject only to the limited refusal grounds set out in Article V. Because virtually all major trading nations are parties to the Convention, the vast majority of foreign arbitral awards qualify for enforcement in Poland under this treaty regime.

Domestically, the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, both Polish and foreign, is regulated in Part 5, Title VIII of the Code of Civil Procedure. The CCP provisions closely track the New York Convention’s language, ensuring consistency between Poland’s international obligations and its domestic procedural rules.

2024–2026 Supreme Court Decisions

A series of Supreme Court rulings between 2024 and 2026 clarified several procedural questions that had caused inconsistent lower-court practice. Most significantly, the Supreme Court addressed the documentary standard for arbitration agreements, holding that courts may insist on the submission of the original arbitration agreement or a duly certified copy, a position that reversed at least one Court of Appeal decision that had accepted a scanned copy as sufficient. This ruling underscores the importance of careful document preparation before filing an enforcement petition. Early indications suggest that lower courts are now applying this standard uniformly, reducing the risk of forum-dependent outcomes.

2026 CCP Changes, The Statutory Conversion Mechanism

Among the 2026 CCP amendments, the introduction of Article 1161¹ created a statutory conversion mechanism that allows certain disputes originally commenced in state courts to be redirected to arbitration where both parties consent. While this provision does not directly alter the enforcement of foreign awards, it signals the Polish legislature’s continued commitment to strengthening the arbitration ecosystem. For creditors, the practical implication is that Poland’s courts increasingly view arbitration, and the enforcement of arbitral awards, as a preferred and efficient dispute-resolution pathway.

Step-by-Step Procedure to Enforce a Foreign Arbitral Award in Poland

The foreign arbitration award enforcement procedure in Poland follows a two-stage model: first, the creditor obtains a court order recognising the award (or declaring it enforceable); second, the creditor initiates actual enforcement proceedings against the debtor’s assets. Below is a practical roadmap covering both stages.

Which Court Hears the Application and Where to File

Applications for recognition or enforcement of a foreign arbitral award must be filed with the competent regional court (sąd okręgowy). Jurisdiction is typically determined by the debtor’s seat or domicile in Poland. If the debtor has no seat or domicile in Poland, jurisdiction may be established by reference to the location of the debtor’s assets. It is critical to identify the correct court before filing, as jurisdictional objections can cause significant delay. Where the debtor’s primary assets are in a city different from its registered seat, creditors should consider whether filing at the asset location offers tactical advantages for the subsequent enforcement stage.

Required Documents, Your Poland Arbitration Enforcement Checklist

A successful application depends on filing a complete documentary package from the outset. Omissions are the single most common cause of delay. The following documents are required:

• The arbitral award. The original award or a duly certified copy. Certification must comply with the standards of the country where the award was issued.
• The arbitration agreement. The original agreement (or a duly certified copy) that conferred jurisdiction on the arbitral tribunal. Following recent Supreme Court guidance, courts may reject mere scanned copies.
• Certified translations. All documents not in Polish must be accompanied by a sworn translation prepared by a certified translator (tłumacz przysięgły) registered with the Polish Ministry of Justice.
• Evidence of finality. Proof that the award is binding on the parties, typically a confirmation from the arbitral institution or a declaration under the applicable arbitration rules.
• Power of attorney. If the applicant is represented by Polish counsel, a duly executed power of attorney (with apostille or consular legalisation, depending on the country of origin).
• Court fee payment confirmation. The statutory filing fee for recognition/enforcement petitions.

Compiling these documents before engaging Polish counsel can save weeks. Industry observers recommend creating a complete document bundle, including notarised and translated copies, before the initial consultation with local counsel.

Translation, Notarisation, and Originals vs Certified Copies

Polish courts require sworn translations for every foreign-language document submitted. Translations must be prepared by a translator officially registered in Poland. Notarisation requirements depend on the country of origin: for Hague Convention countries, an apostille is sufficient; for non-Hague countries, full consular legalisation is required.

The question of originals versus copies has generated significant case law. Following the Supreme Court’s 2024 guidance, the safest approach is to submit the original arbitration agreement or a certified copy bearing the issuing institution’s seal. Applicants who rely solely on scanned or photocopied documents risk having their petition rejected or delayed. Where obtaining the original is impractical, a notarised copy certified by the arbitral institution or a public notary in the seat of arbitration is generally accepted.

The recognition hearing itself is mandatory, Polish courts will schedule a hearing even where the debtor does not file a response. This procedural requirement, confirmed by local practitioners, means that applicants should factor hearing preparation into their timeline from the outset.

Common Grounds for Refusal, and How to Counter Them

The grounds on which a Polish court may refuse to enforce a foreign arbitral award are drawn directly from Article V of the New York Convention and mirrored in the CCP. Understanding each ground, and preparing evidence to rebut it, is essential for any creditor seeking to enforce a foreign arbitral award in Poland.

• Lack of a valid arbitration agreement. The debtor may argue that no binding arbitration agreement existed, or that the agreement was invalid under its governing law. Counter this by submitting the original or certified copy of the agreement, along with evidence of the applicable law and expert opinion if needed.
• Inability to present one’s case. The debtor may claim it was not given proper notice of the arbitral proceedings or was otherwise unable to present its defence. Counter with proof of service, correspondence records, and procedural orders from the tribunal.
• Award exceeds the scope of the arbitration agreement. If the award addresses matters beyond the scope of the submission to arbitration, the court may refuse enforcement of the excess portion. Counter by demonstrating the alignment between the claims submitted and the relief granted.
• Improper composition of the tribunal or procedure. Objections that the tribunal was not constituted in accordance with the parties’ agreement or applicable arbitration rules. Counter with the institutional rules, appointment correspondence, and any challenge decisions.
• Award not yet binding or set aside at the seat. If the award has been annulled or suspended by a competent court in the country of origin, enforcement will typically be refused. The court may also adjourn proceedings pending the outcome of set-aside proceedings abroad.
• Public policy (ordre public). The court will refuse enforcement if the award violates fundamental principles of Polish public policy. This is an ex officio ground, the court may raise it on its own initiative. In practice, Polish courts interpret public policy narrowly and invoke this ground only in exceptional circumstances.

Creditors who anticipate opposition should prepare a comprehensive rebuttal package at the filing stage, including certified procedural records, expert opinions on foreign law, and a legal memorandum addressing each potential ground for refusal.

When the Award Was Set Aside at the Seat, Consequences

Where the arbitral award has been set aside by a court at the seat of arbitration, Polish courts will, in almost all cases, refuse recognition and enforcement. This aligns with Poland’s obligations under Article V(1)(e) of the New York Convention. The practical takeaway is that creditors facing set-aside proceedings at the seat should consider filing the enforcement petition in Poland promptly, ideally before the set-aside decision becomes final, and request the Polish court to adjourn rather than dismiss the application. This preserves the creditor’s procedural position and avoids the need to refile if the set-aside is ultimately reversed on appeal.

Practical Enforcement Measures Once Recognition Is Granted

A recognition order alone does not transfer money to the creditor. Once the court grants recognition and declares the award enforceable, the creditor must initiate separate enforcement proceedings through a court bailiff (komornik sądowy). The range of enforcement measures available in Poland is broad and includes both direct asset seizure and more sophisticated tools designed for complex commercial debtors.

Where the debtor holds assets in multiple jurisdictions, parallel enforcement in Poland and abroad is both permissible and often advisable. Precautionary measures, including ex parte asset-freezing orders, may be available at the recognition stage to prevent the debtor from dissipating assets before full enforcement can be completed. Counsel should apply for these measures simultaneously with the recognition petition wherever there is a credible risk of asset flight.

Enforcing Awards Against Construction Companies, Sector Tactics

Enforcement of awards against construction companies presents unique challenges. Operational assets, heavy equipment, building materials, and contractual receivables, are often the debtor’s most valuable holdings but can be difficult to locate and value. Creditors should consider requesting a charging order against the debtor’s rights under active construction contracts, as well as seeking the seizure of retention sums held by project employers. Appointment of a receiver to manage and realise ongoing contract rights is another option where the debtor is uncooperative. Early asset-tracing is critical: construction companies frequently restructure or transfer assets between related entities to frustrate creditors.

Enforcing Awards in Sports Disputes, Players, Clubs, and Federations

Awards arising from international sports disputes, whether rendered by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) or by federation-specific tribunals, are enforceable in Poland under the same framework. Practical challenges include identifying enforceable assets (players may hold salary receivables through intermediaries), navigating federation regulations that impose additional compliance steps, and coordinating with international sporting bodies that may impose sanctions for non-compliance with awards. Cross-border asset identification and simultaneous enforcement in multiple jurisdictions are often necessary to achieve meaningful recovery.

Timings, Costs, and Realistic Timeline to Enforce International Arbitration in Poland

Timelines for recognition and enforcement depend on court workload, the debtor’s level of opposition, and the completeness of the creditor’s filing. The table below provides realistic ranges based on current practice.

In total, an uncontested enforcement can proceed from filing to asset seizure in approximately three to five months. Contested cases, particularly where the debtor raises public-policy objections or cassation appeals, can extend to nine to twelve months. Court filing fees are modest by international standards, though applicants should budget for sworn translation costs, notarisation, and legal representation, which collectively form the bulk of out-of-pocket expenses.

Tactical Tips, Risk Matrix, and Pre-Enforcement Checklist

Before filing, creditors and their counsel should run through a structured decision framework to ensure the enforcement petition is positioned for success.

• Low risk (uncontested, clear assets). File promptly, submit complete documents, and request expedited hearing. Consider parallel precautionary measures only if there is any indication of asset dissipation.
• Medium risk (debtor likely to contest on procedural grounds). Prepare a comprehensive rebuttal package at the filing stage, including certified procedural records and a legal memorandum. Engage local counsel with specific experience in post-award proceedings.
• High risk (set-aside pending at seat, unclear assets, or public-policy exposure). File the recognition petition promptly to preserve position, apply for precautionary measures, commission an asset-tracing report, and prepare expert opinions on foreign law and public-policy arguments. Consider whether parallel enforcement in another jurisdiction provides a fallback.

A pre-filing checklist should confirm: (1) the award is final and binding; (2) all documents are originals or certified copies with sworn translations; (3) the debtor’s assets in Poland have been identified; (4) any set-aside proceedings at the seat have been assessed; and (5) the correct filing court has been determined based on debtor domicile or asset location.

What If Enforcement Is Resisted, Appeals, Cassation, and Remedies

One of the distinguishing features of Polish enforcement law is that the decision on the recognition or enforcement of a foreign arbitral award is not subject to ordinary appeal. However, either party may lodge a cassation appeal (skarga kasacyjna) with the Supreme Court. The cassation procedure is limited to questions of law and does not permit re-examination of the facts. This means that even where the debtor resists, the scope for overturning a recognition decision is narrow.

The debtor may also seek a stay of enforcement pending resolution of set-aside proceedings in the country of origin. Polish courts have discretion to grant or refuse such stays and will generally require the debtor to demonstrate that the set-aside application has a reasonable prospect of success. Creditors should oppose stay applications with evidence of the debtor’s procedural history and the strength of the award.

Conclusion, Next Steps for Enforcing a Foreign Arbitral Award in Poland

Poland offers a robust, predictable, and broadly arbitration-friendly framework for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. The 2024–2026 reforms have reinforced procedural rigour, particularly around documentary requirements, while maintaining the efficiency that creditors need. Success depends on meticulous preparation: assembling certified originals, obtaining sworn translations, identifying assets early, and selecting the right court.

Foreign creditors who need to enforce a foreign arbitral award in Poland should engage experienced local counsel at the earliest opportunity, ideally before the award is rendered, to ensure that the recognition and enforcement process proceeds without unnecessary delay. A downloadable poland arbitration enforcement checklist covering every required document and procedural step is available to assist with preparation.

This article is intended as general information only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific guidance, contact a qualified lawyer in Poland.

Sources

1. Polish Code of Civil Procedure (Part 5, Title VIII), ISAP Sejm Official Database
2. New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (1958), UN Treaty Collection
3. Chambers and Partners, Poland: Recent Supreme Court Case Law on Enforcement of Arbitral Awards
4. Global Arbitration Review, Challenging and Enforcing Arbitration Awards: Poland
5. Wolters Kluwer Arbitration Blog, 2021–2022 Statistics of Polish Post-Award Case Law
6. KG Legal, Obstacles, Challenges and Tools for Enforcing a Foreign Arbitral Award in Poland
7. CMS Expert Guide, International Arbitration Law and Rules in Poland
8. Dudkowiak & Putyra, Recognition of Foreign Arbitral Awards in Poland
9. Global Legal Post, Poland: Enforcement of Judgments Law Guide