{"id":3973,"date":"2017-01-01T20:11:51","date_gmt":"2017-01-01T20:11:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/millercanfield.pl\/?p=3973"},"modified":"2025-04-14T18:03:42","modified_gmt":"2025-04-14T18:03:42","slug":"the-act-on-the-out-of-court-settlement-of-consumer-disputes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/millercanfield.pl\/en\/the-act-on-the-out-of-court-settlement-of-consumer-disputes\/","title":{"rendered":"THE ACT ON THE OUT-OF-COURT SETTLEMENT OF CONSUMER DISPUTES"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

On 10 January 2017, the Act of 23 September 2016 on the Out-of-Court Settlement of Consumer Disputes, which introduces in the Polish legal order measures allowing for an amicable resolution of consumer disputes arising between nationals of European Union Member States and entrepreneurs established in the territory of Poland, will come into force. This out-of-court dispute settlement scheme will be based on a network of public and private sector entities, which by virtue of their statutory responsibilities or on their own initiative will seek to resolve such consumer disputes pursuant to that law and their internal rules of procedure established independently. To pursue dispute settlement activities, such entities will need to register with a central registry maintained by the President of the Competition and Consumer Protection Office, which is designated as the scheme\u2019s supervisory authority.<\/p>

It should be mentioned in the first place that taking advantage of the out-of-court dispute resolution mechanism is voluntary, and each party will be free not to use this service and instead refer the matter for resolution to a common court of local jurisdiction. Nevertheless, under the law in question, it is presumed that in the absence of the entrepreneur\u2019s statement refusing to participate, this may be deemed an implicit consent to the initiation of the proceedings. In line with this assumption, proceedings will be initiated, in principle, on consumers\u2019 requests, even though the rules of procedure adopted by the entity conducting the proceedings may provide for the proceedings being initiated also on a business operator\u2019s application. A major advantage of having a dispute resolved in this way is the relatively informal nature of the proceedings. The proceedings can be conducted in written or electronic form and will not require, in principle, the physical presence of the parties or their representatives. By design, the proceedings are to be free of charge for the consumer, although the procedural rules may impose fees for conducting the proceedings, provided however that such fees are not so high in the aggregate as to impede consumers from asserting their rights. Importantly, the decision resolving the dispute will be binding only when all parties agree to it. It should also be noted that the effective initiation of dispute settlement proceedings interrupts the limitation period for the claim in dispute, which has important implications for the possibility of enforcing one\u2019s rights before the courts in the future.<\/p>

The legislation under discussion may clearly expedite proceedings in matters where the value of the subject of the dispute is relatively minor and enable their expedient resolution. Currently, seeking the resolution of any matters of this kind through court action may not only entail long waiting for resolution of the dispute but also the need to incur certain costs associated with this mode of enforcing one\u2019s rights. The introduction of the described mechanisms, which provide for the resolution of disputes within a period of 90 days from the time a complete application for the initiation of the proceedings is filed, as well as the principle that participation in the proceedings is free of charge for consumers, addresses the aforementioned difficulties and offers an opportunity to assert claims of this category, while contributing at the same time to improved performance of common courts by reducing the inflow of cases of relatively minor complexity. It should be noted, however, that the law in question merely establishes a certain general framework for proceedings, whereas each dispute will be resolved in accordance with the provisions of the rules of procedure in effect at the specific conciliator. It appears that widespread use of out-of-court consumer dispute resolution mechanisms will crucially depend on the content of such internal rules and the solutions incorporated in them.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\u00a9 Miller, Canfield, W. Babicki, A. Che\u0142chowski i Wsp\u00f3lnicy Sp. k.<\/span>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t