Back to the past part 3 – Planned differences in commercial proceedings.

Exclusion of the application of certain institutions

The exclusion of certain procedural institutions is planned in commercial proceedings. In these proceedings, it will be inadmissible:

• to file new claims instead of or alongside those originally reported – the exception will be the extension of the action to include further repetitive performances (e.g. payment of rent for further periods) and a change in the subject matter of the performance to date with another or its equivalent;
• for the court to suspend proceedings in the event of both parties failing to arrive at a hearing and in the event that the plaintiff does not arrive, while the plaintiff did not request the case to be heard in his absence, while the defendant has not filed a motion to consider the case;
• to change the entity, such as summoning a third party to take part in a case as the defendant, summoning or notifying co-participants who are required to take part in the case (if it transpires that all persons, who need to be jointly involved in the case are not plaintiffs or defendants – plaintiffs are notified, defendants are summoned); notification about the case of the person who should be the plaintiff in the case;
• for the district court to transfer the case to the regional court at the defendant’s request if the defendant filed an action against the plaintiff before that regional court, which affects the plaintiff’s claim or because it is related to it or because the claims of the parties are suitable for offsetting against each other (whereby changes are also planned, in principle regarding offsetting);
• to file a counter-claim.

Shorter terms than in ‘ordinary’ proceedings are expected

The shortening of a number of deadlines provided for in ‘ordinary’ proceedings has been envisaged for commercial proceedings.

The presiding judge and the court will be required to take steps for the matter to be settled within six months. This deadline will be measured from the date on which the statement of claim is filed. This is an instructive term, which means that there are no sanctions for exceeding it.

Experience shows that it is very rare that this deadline is observed. This will be practically impossible in complicated matters, where the involvement of court experts will be required.

The bill provides that, instead of the year specified in the ‘ordinary’ proceedings, the court will discontinue suspended proceedings within six months if no motion is received to initiate them. This period is measured from the date on which the proceedings are suspended:

• at the joint request of the parties;
• at the request of an heir;
• because of the failure of both parties to arrive at the hearing;
• because of the failure of the plaintiff to arrive if the plaintiff did not request the case to be heard in his absence, whereas the defendant did not file a motion to consider the case; as well as
• in the event of a lack of address or the specification by the plaintiff of an incorrect address for the defendant or data enabling the court to determine the PESEL numbers within a specified deadline or the plaintiff’s failure to perform other orders, it will not be possible to proceed with the case.

In commercial proceedings, the court will discontinue the proceedings within six months instead of a year if it concludes that the party is lacking a legal successor, having lost the right of action or the right to be sued. This period will be measured from the date on which the proceedings are suspended for this reason.

The court will discontinue the proceedings within a year instead of two years, as envisaged in ‘ordinary’ proceedings, from the date of the order suspending the proceedings for shortcomings in the membership of the governing bodies of organizational unit, which is a party, preventing it from operating.

After five years from the date on which the judgment becomes final, it will not be possible to request the case to be reopened, with the exception of the situation in which the party was deprived of the ability to act or was not correctly represented (in ‘ordinary’ proceedings, this is and will be ten years).

In the last part of this series, I shall explain the planned separateness in the proceedings on taking evidence.