The Supreme Court has recently published the long-awaited reasoning for its resolution adopted by a seven-judge panel on 16 June 2021 (case III CZP 60/19).

In order to rule on the specific legal issue at hand (concerning the status of the creditor to whose benefit a proscription on divestment or encumbrance of a real property has been put in place so as to protect him against fraudulent conveyance), the Supreme Court conducted nothing less than a comprehensive reassessment of its previous stance on the rights arising from a verdict recognising a claim of fraudulent conveyance (...)


The full text of this article is available in Polish. If you are interested in an English-language version or in discussing the issues raised herein with one of our lawyers, please contact: