In Poland protection of intellectual property rights falls into judicial procedures which means that cases in this category are examined by the courts of law.
Enforcement of these claims takes place in ordinary civil contentious proceedings.
Enforcement of intellectual property rights in Poland takes place before courts of common law under the provisions of the Act of 17 November 1964 - Code of Civil Procedure (Journal of Laws from 1964 No 43, item 296 with further amendments), hereinafter referred to as the abbreviation "CCP". There are no specialized courts in this respect.
The courts competent to give decisions in these cases are voievodship courts competent for the place of residence or the seat of the defendant or the place of the occurrence of the event causing injury (Articles 17, point 2; 27 § 1; 30 and 35 CCP).
It should be noted that the structure of the courts of common law separates commercial courts. It is the subject criteria which decides about subordinating the case to the commercial court. Therefore, if both parties to the dispute are entrepreneurs then the competent court will be Commercial Court (then also voievodship court) and the case will come before this court and will be heard in accordance with the regulations on separate proceedings in commercial cases (Title VII, Section IV a CCP).
The claim is reported in the form of a written statement of claim submitted to the voievodship court competent for the place of residence of the plaintiff or competent for the place of the occurrence of the event causing injury or the infringement of the protected right (Articles 17, point 2; 27 § 1; and 35 CCP). The statement of claim must comply with the formal requirements specified in Articles 126-129 CCP.
Moreover, the statement of claim should contain the reported demand (claims) along with its amount, statement of the facts on the basis of which one demands the required protection and indication of evidence necessary to prove their statements (Article 126 § 2 CCP) and should have an attached power of attorney if the statement of claim is lodged by attorney (Article 126 § 3 CCP).
In proceedings before the courts of common law, obligatory representation by an attorney is not required. An exception is the obligation to use services of attorney or legal advisor in case of appealing by cessation to the Supreme Court against the decision given by a court of the second instance.
However, with respect to intellectual rights protection the party's attorney may be the following persons: attorney, legal advisor, close family member (Article 87 CCP), patent attorney, social institution concerned with support of inventiveness and also organization of collective management of copyrights and related rights.
The laws of Poland do not specify statutory duration of legal proceedings. It requires, however, that proceedings take place without any unnecessary breaks and actions be taken by courts instantaneously. Cases involving intellectual property protection are examined by courts in the order they are brought to the court.
The only dates adjourning the course of the proceedings result from the necessity to maintain equality of both parties in the civil proceedings.
Voievodship courts are the second organizational level of the state courts and are established in voievodship towns. Courts of higher instances than voievodship courts are courts of appeal.
In this context a special "quasi-court" procedure relating to the enforcement of industrial property rights should also be mentioned, which has been established and practised with the Patent Office.
The details of this procedure are regulated in:
- the Law on Inventive Activity,
- the Law on Trademarks, and
- the Law on the Protection of Topographies of Integrated Circuits.
The procedure as mentioned is as follows:
The Patent Office applies, as the first instance the litigation procedure, when taking a decision on:
(a) the invalidation of a patent or of a right of protection for utility model, the invalidation of the right in a topography registration or of the right in the registration of a trademark where the statutory requirements for the registration have not been met or the right in a mark that is well known in Poland has been infringed;
(b) the transfer of a patent or of a right of protection for a utility model or a right in a topography registration obtained by a person not entitled thereto;
(c) the recognition of a patent or a right of protection for a utility model as a dependent patent or a dependent right of protection;
(d) the right to exploit an invention or a utility model in specific cases as mentioned in Articles 43, 70 and 74 of the Law on Inventive Activity;
(e) the ascertainment that a specific production is not covered by a particular patent or a particular right of protection;
(f) the grant of a compulsory licence for a topography of an integrated circuit;
(g) the ascertainment that no similarity exists between a registered trademark and a mark that another enterprise uses or intends to use;
(h) the recognition of the lapse of the right in a trademark registration where the mark has lost its distinctive character or the owner of the right in the trademark registration has ceased economic activities.
In the matters referred to above, the Patent Office takes its decisions in adjudication boards on which the chairmen are judges appointed by the Minister of Justice from among the judges of the district (voyevodian) court of the capital city of Warsaw, and on which are represented social organizations whose activities include the encouragement of inventive activity as well as autonomous organs operating within economic entities, and providing assistance to creators of inventive proposals.
Decisions and determinations made by the Patent Office are appealable to the Board of Appeals with the Patent Office, which reaches its decisions in boards, chairmen of which are judges appointed by the First President of the Supreme Court from among the judges of that Court and on which the above-mentioned organizations are represented.
In the case of any final decision given by the Patent Office or the Board of Appeals which terminates the procedure or is clearly contrary to law, an extraordinary procedure for review may be initiated by the President of the Patent Office, the First President of the Supreme Court, the General Public Prosecutor or the Ombudsman.
To the extraordinary procedure the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are applicable.
