Success of the law firm’s client – suspension of enforcement of the decision imposing the reimbursement obligation

In one such case, the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw suspended the enforcement of a decision issued by the President of the Agency for Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture regarding the recovery of unduly received financial support in the total amount of over one million PLN.

The client of the law firm, a company in the fruit industry, filed a complaint with the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw against a decision ordering the full repayment of financial aid granted to it, which the authority calculated at over PLN 1 million. At the same time, the company included in its complaint a request for the suspension of the enforcement of the contested decision in its entirety. In support of this motion, the company submitted the necessary accounting and financial documents and provided detailed explanations demonstrating that enforcement of the obligation would pose a serious risk to its ability to meet current financial liabilities, maintain liquidity, and preserve jobs for local seasonal workers.

The court issued an order suspending the contested decision, fully supporting the company’s arguments. It noted that the reasoning presented in the application clearly showed that enforcing the decision would result in a difficult financial situation for the complainant and could lead to severe and irreversible consequences that could not be undone even if the complaint were ultimately upheld. The order emphasized: “The complainant’s argumentation is valid and, in the Court’s opinion, constitutes grounds for granting interim protection in the form of suspending the enforcement of the contested decision.”

The client was represented in this proceeding by legal counsel Krzysztof Brysiewicz, legal counsel Dr. Magdalena Porzeżyńska, and trainee attorney Małgorzata Woźniak.

In financial aid recovery cases, the main issue for beneficiaries is often not whether they will win the case, but whether they can survive until the end of the proceedings. Recovery proceedings are typically lengthy, and once a second-instance decision on repayment is issued, enforcement may begin immediately. In such situations, the only real remedy for beneficiaries is to seek suspension of the repayment order. Until recently, administrative courts issued such suspension orders relatively rarely, following a rather conservative line. However, there is now a noticeable shift toward a more rational approach that takes into account the real and significant consequences of immediate repayment for beneficiaries – comments Dr. Magdalena Porzeżyńska.

Very often, repayment orders affect entities that have only recently completed their projects and incurred substantial investment costs. In such cases, being required to return funds that were used to cover those investments severely disrupts the company’s cash flow and can lead to insolvency. Needless to say, this not only prevents the entrepreneur from defending themselves in court but also brings the publicly funded project to an end. “It is encouraging that administrative courts are beginning to recognize the consequences that immediate repayment of grants can have for businesses,” notes Krzysztof Brysiewicz.