Asset Search in Poland: How to Enforce a Ruling Efficiently

Winning in court is only half the job. The real outcome is recovery—turning a ruling into payment, seized assets, or secured value. In Poland, that requires an enforcement strategy built around one core question: where is the debtor’s attachable property, and how fast can you reach it?

Asset search is not a single step. It is a discipline that runs across two key phases: interim protection (to stop dissipation early) and enforcement (to convert a title into recovery). The earlier you plan for both, the less likely your “win” becomes a paper victory.

1) Why asset search should start before you “need” it

Debtors do not wait for final judgments to restructure, transfer, or conceal assets. Therefore, the recovery-focused approach begins at the moment a dispute becomes serious. The goals are simple:

• identify what is realistically recoverable;

• choose remedies that match the debtor’s asset profile;

• and preserve value before it moves.

In practice, a strong merits case with weak asset intelligence often ends in disappointment. Conversely, even a difficult case can settle well if the recovery path is credible.

2) Interim protection: asset search supports effective interim measures

Interim measures are designed to preserve value while the case is pending. However, interim protection works only if you request methods that are executable and tailored to the assets you can actually reach.

That is where asset search matters: it helps you select interim methods that target real-world value—rather than making abstract requests that look strong on paper but fail operationally.

A practical interim strategy typically requires:

• a clear theory of what assets exist and where they sit;

• prioritisation of assets that can be reached quickly;

• and a plan for immediate implementation once the court order is issued.

Importantly, in interim proceedings, enforcement officers usually act within the four corners of the court order. In other words, if the order lists specific assets or methods, execution will follow that map. Therefore, the quality of asset intelligence directly affects the quality of the interim order.

3) Enforcement proceedings: broader asset search is the recovery engine

After you obtain an enforceable title, the objective shifts from preservation to collection. Here, asset search becomes more expansive. Enforcement officers can take a wider approach to identifying the debtor’s property and income streams, and then apply execution measures to convert them into recovery.

This is where many enforcement strategies succeed or fail:

• if you treat enforcement as a formality, you will often get formal results;

• if you treat it as an operational project, you can materially improve outcomes.

A recovery plan should address:

• which enforcement measures best fit the debtor’s asset profile;

• the sequence of steps to prevent evasion;

• and the practical timetable of actions, not just legal milestones.

4) The role of enforcement officers: execution is practical, not theoretical

Enforcement officers are central in both interim and enforcement phases. However, the workflow differs:

• In interim execution, actions usually follow the specific security methods and assets reflected in the order.

• In enforcement execution, enforcement officers can typically use broader tools to identify assets and pursue collection.

Therefore, recovery outcomes often depend on choosing the right enforcement partner and briefing them well. This is not an administrative detail. It is a strategic decision.

Our firm works closely with highly effective enforcement officers who have delivered results in complex, fast-moving matters. That experience is valuable where timing, coordination, and precision decide whether assets are preserved—or disappear.

5) Private asset intelligence: lawful investigations can add leverage

Court-based tools are not the only source of asset information. Polish law also allows lawful private asset intelligence. In particular, licensed investigators can be instructed to locate debtor assets and build a structured asset map.

This can be especially helpful where:

• assets are dispersed across entities and jurisdictions;

• ownership is layered or obscured;

• or the debtor’s footprint is operational rather than balance-sheet obvious.

We work with trusted private intelligence partners and investigative professionals to support asset identification and recovery strategy. Done properly, this can accelerate interim protection, improve execution choices, and strengthen settlement leverage.

6) Practical steps to enforce efficiently in Poland

A recovery-oriented approach typically includes:

1. Start asset mapping early
Identify likely asset classes, locations, and control points.

2. Design interim measures to be executable
Use asset intelligence to propose security methods that can be implemented immediately.

3. Treat enforcement as an operational project
Sequence steps, assign responsibilities, and monitor execution pace.

4. Choose enforcement partners deliberately
Execution quality varies. Coordination and experience matter.

5. Use lawful private intelligence where appropriate
It can strengthen both interim and enforcement phases.

Be effective

If you are planning enforcement in Poland—or you are concerned that a debtor may reorganise assets before you can recover—our Dispute Resolution team can help you build an enforcement-first strategy. We work closely with experienced enforcement officers and trusted investigative partners, and we focus on outcomes: effective recovery, not just a court win.

This publication is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice.