Judicial decisions

The Supreme Court repealed the judgment of the Court of Appeal issued in a case against the Treasury to determine that the rate of the annual fee for perpetual usufruct specified by the defendant was not justified.

Decision on the motion to exclude a judge from adjudicating, based on the judgment of the CJEU of 16 July 2026.

​On 15 July 2026, the Supreme Court, following an appeal submitted by the complainant, repealed the decision of the Court of Appeal in Łódź rejecting the cassation appeal.

​On 19 December 2025, the Supreme Court refused to examine the plaintiff’s (a natural person) application for a declaration of the unlawfulness of the final judgment of the Court of Appeal in Kraków, which had dismissed the plaintiff’s appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance in a claim for payment against the Treasury – the President of the District Court for Kraków-Nowa Huta in Kraków. In the same judgment, a decision was issued on the costs of the proceedings, ordering the plaintiff to pay the costs to the defendant.

​On 20 May 2026, in Case II CSKP 950/23, the Supreme Court resolved the issue concerning the limitation period for claims arising from the non-contractual use of municipal real estate (immovable property).

​On 15 January 2026, the Supreme Court issued a judgment on, inter alia, the application of Article 1171(1) and (2) of the Civil Code in the so-called Swiss franc cases (II CSKP 1062/23). The case concerned consumers’ claims arising from a loan agreement indexed to a foreign currency (Swiss franc) that they concluded with a bank, which proved to be not fully binding on the parties due to the unlawful (abusive) provisions contained therein. In the case, the consumers sought, amongst other things, the reimbursement of amounts paid to the bank as loan instalments.

A provision of a loan agreement or a standard loan agreement indexed to or denominated in a foreign currency, specifying the method of determining the exchange rate based on the average exchange rate of that currency set by the National Bank of Poland and adjusted for the bank's margin, is subject to assessment as to its abusiveness (Article 3851(1) of the Civil Code) solely as a whole.

​On 19 March 2026, the Supreme Court once again repealed a resolution of the National Council of the Judiciary refusing to grant consent for a judge who has reached the retirement age to continue in office, and referred the case for re-examination.

​In the proceedings concerning the extraordinary complaint in a case for payment, the Supreme Court, by order of 14 April 2026, requested the Prosecutor General to forward a copy of the opinion of the President of the Republic of Poland regarding the appointment of Jacek Bilewicz as Deputy Prosecutor General, as required expressis verbis by Article 14(1) of the Act of 28 January 2016 – Law on the Public Prosecutor’s Office (Journal of Laws of 2024, item 390, as amended) within 7 days, under pain of rejection of the extraordinary complaint.

​In the case of a claim for a declaration that the beneficiary’s obligation to repay funds disbursed by PARP under a co-financing agreement for a project co-financed from European funds has expired (does not exist), legal proceedings are inadmissible.