Of all the participants in the construction process mentioned in the Construction Law (henceforth CL), the project owner’s supervising inspector is the only one whose involvement is not, in principle, mandatory. Much is down to administrative discretion. But there are important exceptions.

Under Article 19, paragraph 1 of CL, the architecture and construction administration body may require the investor to appoint a supervising inspector as part of the building permit, where justified by the complexity of the structure or its anticipated impact on the environment. Thus, in principle, the matter is left to the body’s discretion. To be sure, the discretion is not complete; but the body enjoys considerable decision-making latitude.

There are situations, however, when the architecture and construction administration body is obliged to require the project owner to appoint a supervising inspector as part of the building permit. These are listed in Regulation of the Minister of Infrastructure of 19 November 2001 on types of constructions that require the appointment of an investor’s supervising inspector (Journal of Laws of 2001, no. 138, item 1554; henceforth Regulation).

First, under §2 of Regulation, the architecture and construction administration body requires the investor to appoint a supervising inspector if the building permit concerns one of the following types of constructions: (i) public buildings and multi-apartment residential buildings bigger than 2,500 m³; (ii) restoration, renovation, redevelopment, or expansion of listed historic buildings; (iii) buildings and structures taller than 15 metres above ground level; (iv) buildings and structures that include at least one room that is potentially explosive as defined in fire safety regulations; (v) buildings and structures whose construction requires taking into consideration ground movements, including ground movements caused by mining; (vi) buildings and structures with an installed power capacity of 1,000 kW or more; (vii) wired and radio telecommunications lines, both long-distance ones (international, inter-city, and intra-zone) and local lines between exchanges, as well as associated technical buildings and structures bigger than 2,500 m³; (viii) bridge structures of all kinds (viaducts, flyovers, etc.); (ix) flood embankments and levees that are 3 metres tall or higher, or that are designed to protect cities, villages, agricultural areas and forests bigger than 1,000 hectares, as well as associated technical buildings; (x) dams and other types of barrage structures with a difference of water surface levels of 3 metres or more, and with retaining walls 3 metres tall or higher; (xi) storage tanks (both underground and surface-level) for solid, liquid and gaseous materials that are a hazard to people, property and the environment, or with a height (or depression) of 5 metres of more; (xii) inland water intakes and pumping stations with a capacity of over 300 m³/h or at least 100 metres deep; (xiii) water purification plants and sewage treatment plants with a capacity of 50 m³/h or more; (xiv) any structures used for the storage, removal, utilisation, or disposal of waste, regardless of their technical parameters; (xv) power lines of 110 kV or more and associated substations and transformer stations; (xvi) gas pipelines with a nominal pressure of 5 kPa or more, or less if the pipeline is more than 150 mm in diameter (with the exception of gas connectors with a pressure of up to 400 kPa); (xvii) gas compressor stations; (xviii) gas stations equipped with at least two compression lines; (xix) heat pipelines and associated structures and equipment (traditional heat pipelines that are at least 310 mm in diameter and pre-insulated heat pipelines that are at least 200 mm in diameter); (xx) water pipelines that are at least 200 mm in diameter and sewage pipelines that are at least 400 mm in diameter; (xxi) pipelines that transmit liquid or gaseous materials that are a hazard to people, property and the environment; (xxii) national roads, voivodship roads, and county roads, as well as associated structures such as e.g. tunnels; (xxiii) inland shipping canals and drainage canals; (xxiv) drainage systems on areas bigger than 100 hectares; (xxv) power ducts; (xxvi) rail roads, together with traffic-management buildings, structures and equipment; (xxvii) cable railway systems and funiculars used to transport people for sports and tourism purposes; (xxviii) airport movement-area structures.

The requirement to appoint an investor’s inspector also applies to projects other than those listed above, but which are mandatorily subject to an environmental impact assessment under spatial-planning and environmental protection regulations.

Second, under §3 of Regulation, a project owner’s supervising inspector has to be appointed where the planned building (or a part of it) involves the following technical solutions: structural systems such as shells, arcs, domes, or suspension/rope, regardless of their span, as well as foundations other than simple strips or footings placed directly on stable bearing soil; structural components with a span of 12 metres or more, an overhang of 3 metres or more, or a storey height of 6 metres or more; structural components with a live load of 5 kN/m² or more, or subject to variable loads, or dimensioned to account for dynamic or thermal effects, material shrinkage or movement of supports; and structural components that are tensioned on the construction site or on the site where they are built into the building, and strengthened by tendons and anchors. This means that if the building design submitted as part of the application contains any of the above, the architecture and construction administration body is obliged to require the investor to appoint a supervising inspector as part of the building permit. If the body fails to do so, it will be in breach of Regulation, making the building permit defective.

It has been argued in the literature that violation of these provisions of Regulation by the architecture and construction administration body – i.e., failure to require the investor to appoint a supervising inspector – can result in the building permit being declared null and void. Therefore, it is important to make sure that the body has correctly applied the relevant provisions of Regulation in issuing the building permit.

Tomasz Milewski, attorney at law

Originally published in PMR Construction Insight: Poland, No. 1 (274), January 2024