Judicial decisions

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.

Although the claimant was represented by a court-appointed representative (an advocate), the Supreme Court did not award the representative the costs of the unpaid legal aid provided to the claimant ex officio, as the application did not contain a proper request in this regard. The claimant did not submit the declaration referred to in § 3 of the Regulation of the Minister of Justice of 3 October 2016 on the Treasury bearing the costs of unpaid legal aid provided by a court-appointed advocate. This matter was clarified in the grounds for the aforementioned decision.

Subsequently, the representative acting on behalf of the complainant again applied for the reimbursement of the costs of unpaid legal aid, this time submitting a correct (complete) application in this regard. As a result, by a decision of 24 March 2026, the Supreme Court awarded the applicant the above-mentioned costs and ordered their payment from the Treasury.

In the reasons for the decision, it was explained that the costs of unpaid legal aid provided ex officio do not constitute 'litigation costs' within the meaning of Article 98(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP). As a result, the first sentence of Article 109(1) of the CCP does not apply to them, and the claim for payment of such costs does not expire with the conclusion of the proceedings. Although the lawyer representing the party ex officio should, for practical reasons, have applied for their remuneration as early as possible, the failure to do so does not deprive him of the right to remuneration for the work he performed – on a mandatory basis and not on market terms – in connection with the court's decision to assign a court-appointed representative for the plaintiff.

The view that a decision on the costs of unpaid legal aid provided to a party by a court-appointed representative is admissible even after the conclusion of the proceedings is also confirmed by the provisions of § 3 of the Regulation of the Minister of Justice of 14 May 2024 on the Treasury or local government bodies bearing the costs of unpaid legal aid provided by a court-appointed lawyer (and similarly in previous regulations). The provision specifies that an application for the award of costs for unpaid legal aid must include a statement that the fee has not been paid in full or in part. Theoretically, it is thus possible that a court-appointed lawyer might expect the aforementioned fee to be covered, for example, by the party itself (rather than from public funds) until the conclusion of the proceedings.

Judgment of the Supreme Court of 24 March 2026 with the reasons (I CNP 85/24) 

Judgment of the Supreme Court of 19 December 2025 with the reasons (I CNP 85/24) 

Polish original