AIPPI Poland concerned about judicial move

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

AIPPI Poland concerned about judicial move

Sponsored by

PolserviceLogo.jpg

Bartosz Krakowiak of Polservice explains the recent judicial personnel change at the IP court in Warsaw and AIPPI Poland’s position

AIPPI Poland president Bartosz Krakowiak explains the recent judicial personnel change at the IP court in Warsaw and AIPPI Poland’s position.

Poland launched its long-awaited IP court system on 1 July 2020. The system was part of the Code of Civil Procedure reforms, including new procedures for IP-related disputes, aimed at aligning the Polish legal system with the EU Enforcement Directive (2004/48/EC). Various business organisations and professional associations, including the Polish National Group of AIPPI (AIPPI Poland), supported the reforms.

The reforms introduced special IP divisions at five district courts of first instance (Warsaw, Poznań, Gdańsk, Lublin and Katowice) and appeal divisions at two courts of second instance (Warsaw and Poznań). The IP court in Warsaw was entrusted with exclusive jurisdiction over technical IP matters, in particular those related to patents, utility models, computer programs and technical know-how.

An inexplicable judicial move

The IP division of the district court of Warsaw was created on the basis of the previous EU trade marks and community designs division of the district court of Warsaw (EU IP court), which was the only specialised IP court in Poland before 1 July 2020. The presiding judge of the EU IP court was one of the most experienced IP judges in Poland and it was natural for that judge to be re-appointed to the reformed IP division of the district court of Warsaw.

In June 2021, it was revealed that the judge had been unexpectedly moved to a non-IP division of the district court of Warsaw. This caused some concern among IP practitioners in Poland and triggered reactions such as open letters and public statements.

AIPPI Poland’s reaction

As one of the leading associations that supported the reform, AIPPI Poland decided to take a stand by publishing its position paper on 22 June 2021. In the paper, AIPPI Poland emphasized that such unexpected personnel change contradicts the main ideas behind the creation of the specialised IP court system.

The judicial position in this specialised court requires relevant experience, additional education and personal commitment. Therefore, any change in the IP courts, especially at the very beginning of their operation, must be carefully considered so that it does not undermine the purpose of the system and personal effort.

AIPPI Poland expressed this concern, adding that the change may adversely affect the entire reform and discourage judges from specialising in IP. Such instability is a disturbing signal not only for judges but also for IP practitioners and business operators. The innovative economy needs an effective, efficient and predictable judicial system for the resolution of IP-related disputes. This requires experienced and knowledgeable judges representing a broad spectrum of legal views.

AIPPI Poland hopes that its substantive and balanced position will be taken into account by the Polish decision-makers. Read AIPPI’s position paper here (in Polish).

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

On a recent trip to the French capital, we learned that the UPC is squeezing domestic litigation while firms are chasing senior talent, experimenting with AI and considering new ways of organising their practices
Daniel Law says a string of lateral hires and broader expansion plans will strengthen its position to capitalise on Brazil’s burgeoning IP and patent litigation market
Jason Raeburn’s arrival will expand the firm’s London footprint in AI, copyright and tech disputes
The firm is shaping its AI strategy around partnerships with Harvey and Legora alongside internally developed tools from its legal technology company, Eltemate
A dispute Down Under shows why trademark lawyers cannot afford to wait on the sidelines when a rival brand gathers momentum
The Third Circuit’s decision in Thomson Reuters v ROSS marks the first appellate-level decision addressing AI and fair use, prompting copyright counsel to consider arguments around potential licensing markets
Injunctions for HandsFree Labs and Align Technology come as the Court of Appeal warns that busy teams must have the staffing and resources to meet UPC deadlines
The chief technology officer remit, which has been created as the firm is building its litigation team, will include expanding the use of AI in patent and legal work and automating manual processes
Former Hoyng Rokh Moneiger partner Laura Alonso, who brought her team to ECIJA in March, discusses plans to expand further and why ECIJA’s ‘IP DNA’ is helping broaden her work
Amita Haylock discusses building an integrated Asia practice as clients increasingly demand that firms combine IP, technology and data expertise
Gift this article