Slavish imitation

In one of the cases conducted by our law firm, we managed to obtain a groundbreaking judgment regarding the application of Art. 22(1) of the Act, and more precisely, the understanding of the concept of “obviously unfounded action” under the Act.

Both the court of the first instance (the Court of Appeal in Gdańsk) and the court of the second instance (the Court of Appeal in Warsaw) agreed with our argument that this concept should be looked at more broadly, not only through the prism of the mere reading of the claim and the groundlessness perceived “prima facie” by each lawyer. The courts confirmed that this groundlessness may result from a number of elements that will come to light only during the trial, e.g. the content of witness statements, the validity of evidence intended to prove specific theses, as well as the attitude of the plaintiff and the rationality of his behavior (the model of a reasonable entrepreneur who does not recklessly accuses other people of committing acts of unfair competition).

The adoption of such a broader understanding of the concept is also supported – in our opinion – by the simple fact that the court decides on this groundlessness at the end of the trial, and not at the beginning (as in the case of assessing the exemption from costs (Article 109(2) of the Civil Code or dismissing a claim under Art. 191(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure), where the basis for its assessment is basically the lawsuit.

The judgment may constitute an important step towards “unblocking” the application of the provision of Article 22 of the Act on… as a defense against abusive and harassing lawsuits that occur in competitive battles between entrepreneurs. In the sparse case law to date, the provision in the narrow sense has essentially remained dead.

Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Gdańsk of April 14, 2023, ref. no. file XVII GW 63/22 and SA in Warsaw of April 27, 2024 VII AGa 899/23.