Representing Poznań District, we succeeded in a dispute against the State Treasury

At the stage of proceedings before the Court of First Instance, the Law Firm successfully concluded a payment dispute initiated against the State Treasury – the Governor of the Wielkopolska Region, in which attorney-at-law Przemysław Przerywacz represented the Poznań District. The value of the claim, including interest, was approximately PLN 450,000. 

The case concerned claims for supplementation of subsidies granted to local government units to deal with commissioned matters in the field of government administration. The Governor of Wielkopolska delegated to the Poznań District the handling of the return of real estate situated in the City of Poznań, but did not provide sufficient funds necessary for their execution. 

The Law Firm’s arguments in the dispute boiled down, among others, to demonstrating that, pursuant to Article 165, section 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, the independence of local government units is subject to judicial protection, and financial independence is one of the constructive features of the local government’s subjectivity. The essence of this independence, however, is also expressed in the provision of resources to local government units to carry out the public tasks assigned to them and the establishment of appropriate formal and procedural guarantees in this respect, both in the case of the delegation of additional tasks on the basis of the Act, and in the case of the delegation by way of an individual decision of central authorities (or their representative).

Finally, the Regional Court in Poznań, in the judgment of 30 March 2020, file no.: XII C 1641/16, agreed with the legal argumentation presented by attorney-at-law Przemysław Przerywacz from the Department of Judicial Proceedings and Litigation, resolving the dispute in a manner favourable to the Law Firm’s Client. 

It should be noted that the above favourable judgment is another positive decision in disputes conducted on behalf of the Client against the State Treasury – Wielkopolska Governor, in which claims for earlier periods were pursued. What is important is that originally, the admissibility of pursuing these claims in civil proceedings was a highly disputable issue, which manifested itself, for example, in the rejection of the claim due to the inadmissibility of the court proceedings. The Law Firm’s consistent actions – the arguments presented by it – led to a resolution of the case in favour of the Client. The key factor in this respect turned out to be the belief of the Supreme Court that the case will contribute to the development of the law and to the resolution of the case by it in the manner postulated by the Law Firm. Finally, it ruled that Article 49 section 6 of the Act on Income of Local Government Units grants the entity which performs the commissioned task a claim for adjudication of the amount needed for the full and timely performance of the commissioned tasks. The Supreme Court’s decision in this respect was of a precedent nature – at the time when the Law Firm first brought its action against the State Treasury, the Governor of Wielkopolska lacked case law confirming the correctness of its consistently presented position in this respect.