Publication date: January 07, 2025
Legal regulations
The issue of the European order for payment procedure is regulated in the provisions from Article 50515 to Article 50520 of the Act of 17 November 1964 – the Polish Code of Civil Procedure (consolidated text: Journal of Laws of 2024, item 1568), hereinafter referred to as the Civil Procedure Code. The introduction of the above provisions into the Polish legal order was dictated by the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment procedure (OJ EU. L. of 2006, No. 399, p. 1, as amended), hereinafter referred to as the Regulation. If the conditions resulting from the Act and the Regulation are met, the court issues a European order for payment. Pursuant to Article 2 paragraph 1 of the Regulation, its provisions apply in cross-border civil and commercial cases, regardless of the type of court or tribunal. The definition of a cross-border case can be found in Article 3 Regulation: a cross-border case should be understood as a case in which at least one of the parties is domiciled or habitually resident in a Member State other than the Member State of the court seised.
However, it should be remembered that in accordance with Article 12 paragraph 4 letter a of the Regulation, the court issues a European order for payment solely on the basis of information provided by the plaintiff and not verified by the court. This means that the defendant does not participate in these proceedings at all. For this reason, the provisions of the Regulation provide for the possibility of filing an objection to the European order for payment. Filing an objection allows the defendant to defend their rights by joining the court proceedings. The regulations regarding filing an objection are specified in Article 16 of the Regulation and Article 50519 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Filing an objection on an official form
Article 16(1) of the Regulation allows the defendant to file an objection on a form that is available on the e-justice.europa.eu website and, in accordance with the aforementioned provision, is attached together with the European order for payment. Completing the form is relatively simple. After entering the website, you need to enter the appropriate data in the missing fields. The program will ask you to designate the court that issued the order, the parties to the proceedings and their representatives, and the date of issue of the contested European order for payment. After entering all the data, the finished form will be generated and will be available for download. It is worth noting that the Regulation does not require filing an objection on this form. According to point 23 of the recitals to the Regulation, the court should take into account an objection filed in any other written form, provided it has been expressed clearly. Filing an objection on a form is only a convenience for the defendant, as it allows him to challenge the claim in a relatively quick and simple manner[1]. This is also evidenced by the content of Article 16(1). 3 of the Regulation, according to which in the opposition the defendant indicates that he disputes the claim, without having to specify the reasons. It is not required to cite any additional statements – the form itself does not provide a place for attaching them. Moreover, the Regulation does not allow to specify the scope to which the opposition is filed. It will not be possible to dispute only part of the claim[2].
It is also worth raising the issue of the appropriate language of the statement of opposition. Since the regulations in question concern cross-border cases, in the vast majority of cases the parties will not be able to communicate in the same language. The issue of language is addressed in Annex I to the Regulation, and more precisely in the instructions for completing the claim form. According to the Annex, the form must be completed in a language accepted by the court hearing the case. Article 21 paragraph 2 letter b sentence 2 of the Regulation specifies that each Member State may indicate the official language or languages of the institutions of the European Union other than its own official language, which it may accept for the purpose of issuing a European order for payment. Under Article 29 paragraph 1 letter d of the Regulation, Member States are required to provide the Commission with information on the languages accepted. For example, Poland has indicated only Polish, which means that the claim on the form must be written in Polish. However, there is no similar regulation regarding the statement of opposition. As already mentioned, pursuant to Article 16 paragraph 1, the court shall attach the statement of opposition form together with the order. However, it is not required to serve it in the language spoken by the defendant. This issue seems to be legally irrelevant, but for practical reasons it will be more convenient to prepare the opposition in the language in which the European payment order was issued. The language barrier is no obstacle, because after filling in the form on the website, the document can be translated into any language of the Member State.
The opposition to the European order for payment must, according to Article 16(1) of the Regulation, be addressed to the court of “origin”, i.e. to the court that issued the order for payment. Article 16(4) of the Regulation specifies the form of opposition: the opposition must be filed on paper or by another means of communication, including electronic communication, accepted by the Member State of origin and available to the court of origin. As a rule, the form must be printed out, signed by an authorised person and sent to the court by post. However, this is not necessary, as the Regulation allows opposition to be filed by electronic communication if the Member State provides for such a possibility. If the defendant opts for electronic form, an electronic signature in accordance with the meaning of Community law will be required, as referred to in Article 16(5) of the Regulation. Art. 125 § 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that it is possible to file procedural documents using an electronic information system – if a special provision so provides or a choice has been made to file procedural documents using an electronic information system, procedural documents in this case shall be filed exclusively via an electronic information system. Documents not filed via an electronic information system do not produce the legal effects that the act associates with filing a document with the court, of which the court instructs the person filing the document. However, it is necessary to bear in mind Art. 125 § 21a of the Code of Civil Procedure, which makes the possibility of filing documents electronically dependent on the technical capabilities of the court. The defendant filing an objection in the above manner must always check, e.g. on the website of the competent court, whether it is possible to file procedural documents electronically. It is also possible to file an objection directly with the court that issued the order. The defendant has the right to send or personally deliver the objection to the appropriate court, in accordance with Art. 16 sec. 2 of the Regulation, 30 days from the date of service of the order on him.
Filing an objection to a European payment order is free of charge[3]. However, this information is difficult to identify in the Polish legal system. Article 3 of the Act of 28 July 2005 on court costs in civil cases (Journal of Laws of 2024, item 959, as amended), lists documents subject to a fee, but this is not an exhaustive list and the relevant information should be sought in the further part of the Act – an objection to a European payment order is not mentioned in this provision. Article 19 paragraph 1 of the Act on court costs refers only to an application to set aside a European payment order – half of the fee is charged for it. However, there is no information about an objection to a European payment order, so it should be assumed that filing this document does not entail an obligation to pay.
Consequences of filing an objection
The effects of filing an opposition are regulated in Article 17 paragraph 1 of the Regulation. If the defendant complies with the 30-day period specified in Article 16 paragraph 2 of the Regulation, the proceedings will be held before the competent courts in the Member State of origin, unless the plaintiff has expressly requested that the proceedings be terminated in such a case. Further proceedings will be held in accordance with the rules of the European Small Claims Procedure or the relevant national civil procedure. In accordance with Article 17 paragraph 2 of the Regulation, if the plaintiff fails to indicate which procedure is to be applied or indicates the European Small Claims Procedure and his claim cannot be examined in this procedure, the proceedings will be transferred to the relevant national civil proceedings, unless the plaintiff has expressly requested that such transfer not be made. In accordance with Article 17 paragraph 4 of the Regulation, the transfer of the case to civil proceedings within the meaning of Article 17 paragraph 1 of the Regulation is subject to the law of the Member State of origin. This issue has been regulated by the Polish legislator in Article 50519 of the Civil Procedure Code, which states that in the event of a properly filed opposition, the European payment order ceases to be valid and the court shall refer the case to a court of general jurisdiction. In cases specified in the Act, the court shall examine the case in accordance with the provisions on separate proceedings (e.g. the court shall apply the provisions on proceedings in commercial cases), excluding the provisions on payment order and summary proceedings.
Under Article 12 paragraph 4 letter c, the defendant, after receiving the payment order, is informed that in the event of an objection, the proceedings will be continued before the competent courts of the Member State of origin in accordance with the provisions governing ordinary civil proceedings. This provision and Article 17 paragraph 1 of the Regulation mean that an objection initiates ordinary civil proceedings (this also applies to separate proceedings)[4]. However, it should be remembered that after an objection is filed, the European order procedure is already closed, which is clearly stated in recital 24 of the Regulation – there is an automatic transition to the proper civil proceedings. In this way, the EU legislator has enabled the plaintiff to continue to fight for his claims. It is also worth noting that the plaintiff has the right to discontinue its pursuit. In accordance with Article 50519 § 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, if the plaintiff requests that the proceedings be terminated in the event of an objection, the court shall discontinue the proceedings, ruling on the costs as in the case of withdrawal of the claim.
When analysing the effects of filing an objection, the defendant’s situation should also be addressed. As already outlined, the possibility of filing an objection on a form without raising any claims or evidence is, in the legislator’s assumptions, to make it easier for the defendant. He is also not required to raise any objections, which means that the defendant is not obliged to raise an objection of lack of domestic jurisdiction of the court that issued the payment order. The problem is that if the defendant enters into a dispute before a given court in a specific case, the domestic jurisdiction will be consolidated and this objection can no longer be raised. The issue was resolved by the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union C-144/12 Goldbet Sportwetten GmbH v. Massimo Sperindeo[5]. The Court found that the mere filing of an objection, without raising an objection of lack of jurisdiction, cannot be treated as entering into a dispute. The justification indicated that the European order procedure is not adversarial in nature – the defendant does not participate in it and learns about it at the same time as the obligation to pay arises. Moreover, the Court emphasized that filing an objection is an action within the European order procedure. Its effect is an automatic transition to the proper civil proceedings – filing an objection is not the first action within this process, but the one that ends the European order procedure. For the same reasons, an objection provided with objections and statements also does not result in the establishment of a dispute, as the Court also ruled in the judgment cited above. The defendant will be able, after filing an objection, to submit appropriate explanations and preparatory documents with appropriate objections.
Summary of considerations
The establishment of the European order for payment procedure was aimed, in accordance with Article 1 paragraph 1 of the Regulation, at simplifying, speeding up and reducing the costs of court proceedings in cross-border cases concerning undisputed monetary claims. The manner in which the defendant has the opportunity to file an objection certainly implements these postulates. It is worth noting that the European Union bodies allow anyone against whom a European order for payment has been awarded to formulate an objection in a very simple way. The defendant does not need a representative to perform this action and can only appoint one later – at the stage of civil proceedings, which will be initiated by filing an objection in accordance with the regulations. It is important to remember to comply with the 30-day deadline, while remembering that all the rules have been described in Council Regulation (EEC, EURATOM) No. 1182/71 of 3 June 1971 specifying the rules applicable to periods, dates and time limits (OJ EU. L. of 1971 No. 124, p. 1, as amended). It is on the basis of this regulation that the deadlines specified in the legal acts of the European Union should be calculated. Thanks to the introduction of the regulation, it has become possible to pursue cross-border claims faster, and the defendant can defend his/her case very effectively.
[1]P. Rylski , The European payment order in court practice [in:], Law in action Volume 12 Civil cases, E. Holewińska-Łapińska (ed.), Institute of Justice, Warsaw, 2012, pp. 180-181.
[2]J. Pisuliński, European payment order, EPS 2008, no. 1, pp. 4-14.
[3]Ł. Panasiuk, European order procedure – practical problems, https://palestra.pl/pl/czasopismo/wydanie/3-4-2013/artykul/europejskie-postepowanie-nakazowe-problemy-praktyczne
[4]M. Manowska [in:] A. Adamczuk, P. Pruś , M. Radwan, M. Sieńko, E. Stefańska, M. Manowska, Code of Civil Procedure. Commentary. Volume II. Art. 478-1217, 4th edition, Warsaw 2021, art. 505(19).
[5]Ł. Panasiuk, European order procedure – practical problems, https://palestra.pl/pl/czasopismo/wydanie/3-4-2013/artykul/europejskie-postepowanie-nakazowe-problemy-praktyczne