by dr Andrzej Jakubiec - adwokat, mediatorLEGAL FEES AND LITIGATION COSTS IN POLAND
The financial predictability of litigation costs in Poland is a decisive factor for foreign investors evaluating whether to pursue a commercial dispute. Understanding court fees, legal costs, and procedural risks is essential for making informed, ROI‑driven decisions.
See 3 Key Commercial Litigation costs in Poland:
- In the majority of commercial and civil cases, the court entry fee is 5% of the claim value, capped at PLN 200,000 (approx. EUR 45,000). Are there additional costs during the trial? Yes. Apart from the entry fee, you should budget mainly for:
- Expert Witness Fees: If the case requires technical knowledge, the court will appoint an expert. You will be required to pay an advance (zaliczka) for their remuneration.
- Sworn Translators: Since the official language of the court is Polish, all foreign documents and testimonies must be translated by certified professionals.
The “Loser Pays” Principle: Risks of Litigation Cost in Poland
What happens if I lose the case?
Litigation costs in Poland follow the “loser pays” principle. If you lose, you are generally required to reimburse the winning party for their court fees and a portion of their legal representation costs, as defined by statutory rates.
Example: Estimated Cost of a €700,000 Commercial Dispute in Poland
To illustrate the typical cost structure of litigation in Poland, consider a commercial dispute with a claim value of €700,000.
Court fee.
In most commercial cases, the court entry fee amounts to 5% of the claim value, which in this example would be approximately €35,000 (subject to the statutory cap).
Expert witness fees.
If the case requires technical or financial expertise, the court will appoint an expert. Depending on the complexity of the dispute and the number of expert opinions required, the advance for expert fees may range from approximately €2,000 to €10,000.
Legal representation.
The statutory minimum fee for legal representation in a case of this value is approximately PLN 15,000. In practice, the actual cost of legal services is usually higher and depends on the nature and complexity of the dispute, as statutory tariffs rarely reflect the real cost of complex commercial litigation.
Additional costs in our Firm typically include:
- court hearing attendance, for example approximately PLN 1,500 per hearing,
- hourly legal work, which in our firm’s case is €250 per hour for cross-border legal services delivered in English.
Other procedural costs.
Minor procedural expenses, such as travel reimbursement for witnesses, are usually relatively small (often around €50 per witness).
Risk of losing the case.
If the claim is unsuccessful, the losing party is generally required to reimburse the opposing party for their court costs and a portion of their legal representation expenses, according to statutory tariffs.
Alternative dispute resolution.
An alternative to court litigation is ADR, such as mediation. Mediation is usually significantly less expensive than a full court trial. In a dispute of this scale, a mediator’s fee may be approximately PLN 10,000 (around €2,400), although legal assistance costs should also be taken into account.
In our firm, legal services in mediation would typically be billed at the hourly rate of €250, potentially combined with a success fee ranging between 5% and 15% of the recovered amount, reduced by the fees already paid for hourly legal work.
In disputes other than monetary claims, success fees are determined using different criteria, depending on the economic value and strategic importance of the outcome.
Legal Fees: Why Predictability is Our Priority
For many international companies, litigation is not merely a legal procedure but a strategic instrument for enforcing contracts and protecting their investments.
At Jakubiec & Partners, we understand that foreign business clients need a fixed framework to operate. We compete on the quality of our work and our deep experience in commercial disputes and partnership mediations. Our pricing reflects a balance between senior-level expertise and operational efficiency, allowing us to provide high-quality representation without the cost structure typical of large international firms.
Transparent Remuneration Models
Our fee structure is always individually tailored to the specific case. However, the one thing that never changes is transparency. All rules regarding our remuneration are detailed in the initial contract. We guarantee that you will not be surprised by hidden costs mid-litigation.
Unrivaled Security and Professional Liability
We provide a level of security that goes beyond standard market practice:
- Insurance: Our firm is backed by a professional liability insurance (OC) of €2.5 million.
- Personal Accountability: As the lead partner, I am personally and fully liable with my entire private assets for the Firm’s obligations.
- Conflict of Interest & NDA: Before we start, we sign a strict NDA and a Conflict of Interest Verification Agreement. Both are secured by contractual penalties (liquidated damages) payable to the Client. We provide a written statement of the conflict check result, also secured by a penalty.
How much does a good lawyer in Poland charge per hour?
In addition to court fees and procedural costs, companies involved in cross-border disputes must also consider the cost of legal representation.
For cross‑border legal services delivered in English, our standard hourly rate is EUR 250 (net). Services provided in French or Russian are billed at EUR 300 (net). These rates apply to consultations and document drafting.
In the case of mediations, negotiations, and court litigation, fees are determined individually. They depend on the specific nature of the case, its complexity, and the total value of the dispute. If you would like to receive a quote for a specific matter, please feel free to contact us directly.
Experience Across Borders: Who Have We Helped?
We have successfully represented and advised clients from:
- North America: USA
- Europe: France, Germany, Switzerland, UK, Ukraine
- Asia/Middle East: Turkey
Our landmark projects include the legal management of the share acquisition in the Se-ma-for studio (Oscar winner). I worked for investors from Switzerland and the UK in this case. Then I applied this experience in many other M&A transactions. This experience allows us to understand both the legal and cultural aspects of international business disputes.
Frequently Asked Questions (main FAQ):
- Can I recover my legal fees in Poland? Yes, the court can award the reimbursement of legal representation costs from the losing party. They are often based on official state tariffs which may differ from your actual contract.
- Is mediation cheaper than a court trial? Almost always. Mediation avoids high Litigation costs in Poland. We actively encourage negotiations between partners to settle disputes efficiently.
- Can I trust a Polish lawyer in a case against a Polish company? Yes. We place immense importance on transparency and the elimination of any potential conflict of interest. This is why we have implemented a rigorous onboarding procedure. It goes far beyond the standard requirements of the Polish Bar Act and the Code of Ethics for Attorneys-at-law. We conduct a detailed investigation into any professional, business, or social connections between our team members and the opposing party. They include their management board, supervisory board, or disclosed shareholders. This verification is performed under a separate agreement for a fixed fee of EUR 250 net. Following this audit, we provide the Client with a written declaration regarding the conflict check results. This statement is legally binding and subject to a contractual penalty (liquidated damages) payable by us to the Client.
Other questions
- How long does a commercial court case usually take in Poland? On average, commercial disputes in Poland take between 12 to 24 months for a first-instance ruling. However, through our specialized negotiation and mediation services, we are often able to reach a settlement much faster. It allows us save our clients both time and court fees.
- Do I need to travel to Poland for the court hearings? Not necessarily. In many cases, especially after the recent digitalization of the Polish judiciary, hearings can be conducted remotely via video conferencing. Furthermore, as your legal representatives, we can handle most procedural matters on your behalf through a power of attorney.
- Is it possible to recover the 5% court entry fee if we settle? Yes. If a settlement is reached before the trial begins or during mediation, the Polish court system allows for a partial or even full refund of the court fee. It depends on the stage of the proceedings. If you win the case, the court fee may also be reimbursed by the losing party.
How to find a trusted law firm in Poland? You can also read the following guide:
Before recommending litigation, we carefully analyse the contractual documentation, the available evidence and the economic context of the dispute to assess the realistic chances of success.
If you are considering litigation or negotiations with a business partner in Poland, we can provide a preliminary legal and strategic assessment of your case. Based on the available documents, we will explain the realistic litigation risks, estimated costs, and possible negotiation strategies before any formal engagement.
In many situations, a short initial consultation is sufficient to determine whether litigation in Poland is economically justified or whether negotiation or mediation would be a more effective solution.
If you would like to discuss a specific dispute or potential claim, you can contact us directly to arrange a consultation in English.
by dr Andrzej Jakubiec - adwokat, mediatorJAKUBIEC & PARTNERS. A TRUSTED LAW FIRM IN POLAND
Are you looking for a trusted law firm in Poland? Foreign clients operating in Poland expect not only legal expertise, but also clear rules of cooperation and real guarantees of professional responsibility. We understand these expectations. Choosing a law firm in another country naturally raises questions about confidentiality, conflicts of interest, independence and financial security. To address these concerns, we have implemented solutions that make these issues transparent, measurable and predictable. In our firm you can find accountability, transparency and international standards.
NDA with a Contractual Penalty – it is our standard
Why are we a trusted law firm in Poland? At the client’s request, we sign a Non‑Disclosure Agreement that includes a contractual penalty (liquidated damages clause). This mechanism simplifies potential claims: in the event of a breach, the client does not need to prove the amount of damage — only that the breach occurred.
You can read more about our NDA’s philosophy: https://jakubieciwspolnicy.pl/en/nda-in-poland-contractual-penalty/
Written Conflict‑of‑Interest Statement
We provide a written declaration confirming that we have no business or personal ties to the opposing party. Transparency in this area is a core element of international professional standards.
Trusted Law Firm in Poland – Contractual Financial Liability
Our agreements may include a contractual penalty payable to the client in the event of a breach of confidentiality or a false conflict‑of‑interest statement. This ensures clear risk allocation and strengthens the security of cooperation.
Full Responsibility and Financial Stability. The Trusted Law Firm in Poland provides it.
The founder of the firm, attorney‑at‑law Dr. Andrzej Jakubiec, bears full and unlimited personal liability for obligations towards clients, as required by Polish law.
This responsibility is additionally secured by:
- professional liability insurance up to EUR 2.5 million, including contractual liability,
- the option to purchase an additional dedicated insurance policy for high‑value projects,
- full compliance with the Code of Ethics of the Polish Bar.
This combination of personal accountability and robust insurance protection provides clients with real financial security.
Experience with International Clients
We provide legal services to foreign companies operating in Poland. Our experience includes:
Switzerland – capital investments, support for technology startups, complex inheritance matters,
USA – IT contracts between American technology companies and Polish engineering teams,
France and Germany – shareholder disputes, transport law, intellectual property, ongoing corporate advisory,
United Kingdom and Sweden – capital investments, including in the technology sector, and multi‑layered business disputes,
Ukraine – legal support for agricultural and manufacturing companies.
A significant part of our practice involves shareholder disputes, conflicts in family‑owned businesses and projects requiring access to sensitive financial data, including due diligence processes.
Legal Expertise and Interdisciplinary Knowledge
Our dispute resolution and negotiation practice is grounded in strong academic preparation and an interdisciplinary approach.
The founder’s qualifications include:
a PhD in business law,
postgraduate studies in negotiation and mediation (University of Warsaw),
postgraduate studies in forensic psychiatry and psychology (University of Łódź),
ongoing education in behavioural analysis.
This combination of legal expertise and understanding of conflict dynamics allows us to conduct cases with attention to both formal legal aspects and the psychological mechanisms underlying disputes.
Contact Us
If you are looking for a trusted law firm in Poland that operates with ethics, clear rules of responsibility and transparent cooperation standards, we invite you to get in touch.
We will be pleased to discuss your project and the available confidentiality and contractual‑liability safeguards.
You can contact us by phone, email or through the form on our website:
📩 kancelaria@jakubieciwspolnicy.pl
📞 536 270 935
FAQ – Frequently Asked Questions
1. Can you provide a draft NDA?
Yes. We provide an NDA draft upon request. Clear rules for information protection are a foundation of our cooperation.
2. Does your insurance cover contractual liability, including penalties under an NDA?
Yes. Our professional liability insurance up to EUR 2.5 million covers contractual liability, including agreed liquidated damages.
3. Does the founder of the firm bear personal liability for obligations towards clients?
Yes. Under Polish law, an attorney running a law firm bears full and unlimited personal liability.
4. Is an NDA with a contractual penalty standard practice in Poland?
No, it is not common. In our practice, however, we treat it as an element of transparent risk allocation for international clients.
5. Can financial security be increased for large projects?
Yes. For high‑value projects, we can arrange an additional dedicated insurance policy.
How to find a trusted law firm in Poland? You can read also this text:
by dr Andrzej Jakubiec - adwokat, mediatorCONFIDENTIALITY AND NDAS IN POLAND
We do not sign NDAs because we doubt our team, our procedures, or our professionalism. We sign them because we are completely confident in all of these — and we want our Clients to see that.
NDA with contractual penalty? Yes, we do accept it.
We are a Polish law firm advising foreign companies, international investors and SMEs operating in Poland. We understand that confidentiality is not a formality — it is a fundamental business requirement. Sensitive commercial information, strategic plans, internal disputes, shareholder conflicts or financial data must remain fully protected.
Confidentiality is not only a contractual matter. Under Polish law, attorneys are bound by strict professional secrecy obligations. This statutory duty, combined with GDPR compliance and internal security procedures, forms the foundation of how we protect client information in every legal engagement.
NDA with Contractual Penalty – A Clear Allocation of Risk
We do not want to put anyone in the uncomfortable position of having to prove damages in court in order to recover losses caused by a breach of confidentiality. For that reason, we are prepared to sign a comprehensive Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) at the outset of cooperation. It includes a clearly defined contractual penalty mechanism where appropriate.
Under Polish law, a contractual penalty (kara umowna) simplifies enforcement: the injured party does not need to prove the precise amount of damage, only the fact of breach. In cross-border business relations, this predictability is often essential.
We are ready to agree on reasonable and proportionate penalty clauses reflecting the scale and nature of the project. This is not a symbolic gesture — it is a transparent allocation of risk and responsibility.
Such clauses are standard in international business practice, and we have no hesitation in accepting them within a professionally structured framework. Our professional liability insurance (EUR 2.5 million), which also covers contractual liability, provides an additional layer of financial security and ensures that any agreed responsibility is effectively backed by insurance coverage.
How We Protect Confidential Information
Our approach is simple and disciplined:
- we protect all data with strict internal protocols and controlled access systems,
- only authorised lawyers and team members involved in a specific matter have access to case materials,
- we maintain structured and traceable document management procedures,
- we apply GDPR-compliant data protection standards,
- we understand the commercial and litigation consequences of any breach of confidentiality.
In many disputes — especially commercial and corporate conflicts — improper handling of confidential information becomes a separate legal risk and may escalate the conflict itself. This is particularly relevant in M&A transactions, during Due Diligence processes, and in shareholder disputes, where access to sensitive financial and strategic data is central to the matter. Our role as legal advisors in Poland is not only to resolve disputes, but to prevent additional exposure.
Confidentiality as Part of Professional Ethics and Legal Services in Poland
Foreign clients often tell us that what they value most is not only legal expertise, but also discretion, predictability and accountability. We share this view.
Signing an NDA with a clearly structured contractual penalty is not a burden — it is a natural extension of:
- our statutory professional secrecy obligations under Polish law,
- our experience in cross-border legal services,
- our understanding of international compliance standards,
- and our commitment to secure, trustworthy cooperation.
If your business requires absolute discretion when operating or investing in Poland, we are prepared for it. Safeguarding your information is not just part of our work — it is a principle we stand by.
Contact Our Law Firm in Poland
Do you want to know how we work, discuss confidentiality arrangements, or request an offer for legal services? Feel free to contact us.
A conversation about the terms of cooperation is an opportunity for both sides to define expectations clearly and build a solid foundation of trust.
📩 kancelaria@jakubieciwspolnicy.pl
📞 +48 536 270 935
We know that confidentiality is the foundation of the attorney–client relationship worldwide. That is why we look to the highest international standards — such as the ABA’s guidance on confidentiality https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_6_confidentiality_of_information/(americanbar.org in Bing — to ensure that our Clients receive the same level of protection.
NDA with contractual penalty. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
1. Can you send us your NDA template?
Yes, of course. Please contact us and we will gladly provide a draft of our Non-Disclosure Agreement. For us, clear confidentiality terms are a foundation of professional cooperation.
2. Does your insurance cover contractual obligations such as NDA penalties?
Yes. Our professional liability insurance, up to EUR 2.5 million, also covers contractual liability, including obligations arising from agreed contractual penalties. This ensures that our commitments are financially secured.
3. Does the leader of your law firm bear personal liability toward clients?
Yes. Advocate Dr Andrzej Jakubiec, the founder of our law firm, bears full and unlimited personal liability for obligations toward our Clients. This reflects our approach to responsibility and professional integrity.
4. Is signing an NDA standard practice on the Polish legal market?
No. Many law firms in Poland are still reluctant to sign NDAs with contractual penalties. We are proud to do so. In our view, accepting clearly defined confidentiality obligations is a natural element of modern legal services for international business.
NDA in Poland – Jakubiec & Partners Key Standards, Risks & Protections
| Element | What it Means in Practice | Why It Matters | Our Standard |
|---|---|---|---|
| Confidential Information Definition | Precise scope: documents, data, strategies, financials, disputes, IP, internal processes. | Eliminates ambiguity and prevents loopholes in enforcement. | We define it narrowly, measurably, and in a way enforceable in cross‑border settings. |
| Contractual Penalty (Kara Umowna) | Fixed amount or proportionate penalty payable upon breach—no need to prove damages. | Predictability and fast enforcement, especially for foreign companies. | We accept reasonable penalties; our EUR 2.5M insurance covers contractual liability. |
| Professional Secrecy | Statutory attorney–client confidentiality under Polish law. | Stronger than any NDA clause; breach is a disciplinary and legal offence. | We combine statutory secrecy + GDPR + internal protocols for maximum protection. |
| GDPR & Data Security | Controlled access, encrypted storage, documented procedures, traceability. | Reduces risk of data leaks and regulatory exposure. | Only authorised team members access files; full audit trail and secure systems. |
| Scope & Duration | Clear timeframe, permitted use, and persons allowed to access information. | Prevents misuse and “scope creep” after project completion. | We set realistic, enforceable durations aligned with business risk. |
| Exclusions | Public info, independently developed data, disclosures required by law. | Avoids disputes over information that cannot be kept confidential. | We draft exclusions precisely to avoid abusive interpretations. |
| Return/Destruction of Data | Obligatory return or deletion of materials after cooperation ends. | Ensures no residual data remains in circulation. | We follow strict internal off‑boarding and data‑destruction procedures. |
| Liability & Insurance | Financial responsibility for breach + insurance coverage. | Guarantees real, not symbolic, protection. | EUR 2.5M professional liability insurance covering contractual liability. |
| Cross‑Border Predictability | Alignment with international standards (EU, UK, US practice). | Essential for investors and foreign companies entering Poland. | We draft NDAs compatible with international expectations and Polish enforcement. |
You can read about us here: https://jakubieciwspolnicy.pl/en/english-speaking-lawyer-in-poland-commercial-litigation-expert/
If you are courious, how do we perceive the shareholders disputes in modern conflict environment, read these two articles:
by dr Andrzej Jakubiec - adwokat, mediatorHOW TO FIND THE RIGHT LAW FIRM IN POLAND?
It is a Practical Guide for Foreign Companies. Choosing a law firm in a foreign jurisdiction is never simple. For international companies operating or entering the Polish market, the challenge is even greater: differences in legal culture, language barriers, unfamiliarity with court procedures, and uncertainty about enforcement standards may create real business risk. This guide provides foreign businesses with a practical framework for choosing a reliable, competent, and trustworthy law firm in Poland — particularly in the area of commercial litigation in Poland, dispute resolution in Poland, and cross-border enforcement in Poland. It is based not only on formal criteria, but also on real experience in representing foreign investors and SMEs in complex corporate and dispute matters.
1. English speaking lawyer in Poland
The base is to find an English speaking lawyer in Poland. For foreign companies, seamless communication is fundamental. A Polish lawyer should be able to:
- communicate fluently in business-level English (or German, French, Russian etc.),
- prepare bilingual contracts and pleadings,
- explain Polish legal procedures clearly and without unnecessary jargon,
- represent the client in negotiations and before Polish commercial courts.
A short introductory call is often enough to verify whether the lawyer is truly an English speaking lawyer in Poland, or whether communication will be filtered through intermediaries.
2. Look for Proven Experience With Foreign Investors
Cross-border representation requires more than language skills.
In my practice, I have:
- represented Swiss and UK investors in the acquisition of the Oscar-winning Se-ma-for Film Studio in Łódź,
- served on the supervisory board of Se-ma-for on behalf of foreign investors,
- handled joint venture disputes and shareholder conflicts,
- represented foreign clients (including from Sweden and France) in family-business conflicts involving commercial structures,
- established companies in Poland for German and Ukrainian entrepreneurs,
- structured M&A transactions and investor agreements as a PhD in commercial law.
These matters required not only knowledge of Polish corporate and civil procedure law, but also an understanding of how foreign investors assess legal risk, governance standards, and strategic exposure.
When choosing a law firm, ask for specific examples of cross-border experience — not general declarations.
3. Experience in Commercial Litigation and Shareholder Disputes
Many foreign companies seek assistance only once a conflict has escalated: unpaid invoices, breach of contract, deadlocked joint ventures, or shareholder disputes. Effective representation in commercial litigation in Poland requires:
- strong courtroom experience,
- strategic use of interim measures,
- familiarity with evidentiary rules under the Polish Civil Procedure Code,
- experience in shareholder disputes and corporate governance conflicts,
- knowledge of enforcement mechanisms through Polish bailiffs.
The Mediation and Negotiation Advantage: Litigation, however, is not always the optimal path. In many cross-border disputes, a carefully designed negotiation strategy or mediation process can significantly reduce financial and reputational risk. Early strategic intervention often determines whether a matter escalates into full-scale litigation or is resolved through structured settlement discussions.
I completed postgraduate studies in Negotiations, Mediations, and other Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods at the University of Warsaw: https://wpia.uw.edu.pl/pl/studia/studia-podyplomowe/podyplomowe-studia-negocjacji-mediacji-i-innych-alternatywnych-metod-rozwiazywania-sporow, as well as postgraduate studies in Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology at the University of Łódź: https://www.wpia.uni.lodz.pl/psychiatria. To further refine my strategic approach to conflict, I am currently continuing my professional development at the Behavioral Analysis Studies in Wrocław: https://sie.edu.pl/analiza-behawioralna/#Opis.
I am also a member of the Advocates’ Mediation Center at the District Bar Council in Łódź: https://lodz.adwokatura.pl/adwokackie-centrum-mediacji/mediatorzy/
4. Understand the Real Concerns of Foreign Clients
Foreign entrepreneurs often express specific concerns:
- unpredictability of court practice,
- duration of proceedings,
- litigation costs,
- reliability and accountability of local counsel.
I am personally familiar with these concerns.
Predictability and Timelines
I outline realistic timeframes and procedural stages at the outset of every case. While no responsible lawyer can guarantee the duration of court proceedings, it is possible to explain procedural milestones, likely evidentiary phases, and potential appeal scenarios.
Cost Transparency
I provide a clear cost structure and explain which elements are predictable (court fees, standard procedural costs) and which depend on developments during litigation. Clients receive a structured estimate and ongoing updates to avoid financial uncertainty.
Professional Accountability
As a Polish attorney, I bear personal professional liability. I guarantee the quality, integrity, and diligence of our work with my own name and assets. My professional liability insurance coverage amounts to EUR 2.5 million.
5. Independence and Conflict-of-Interest Procedures
Foreign companies should always request:
- a written conflict-of-interest check,
- confirmation of independence,
- written engagement terms.
Professional dispute resolution in Poland requires strict compliance with ethical and procedural standards.
6. Choose a Firm That Matches Your Scale
In our experience representing foreign SMEs in Poland, the most common strategic mistake is choosing a law firm that is too large — primarily because of brand recognition.
The Risk of Over-Scaled Structures
In such firms:
- the client often pays high hourly rates,
- the matter is delegated to a junior associate with limited courtroom experience,
- the well-known partner signs off but is not deeply involved.
Direct Partner Involvement
For many foreign SMEs involved in disputes or cross-border enforcement in Poland, a specialized boutique firm provides:
- direct partner involvement,
- strategic consistency,
- proportional cost structure,
- real courtroom experience.
Before instructing any firm, ask directly:
“Who will personally conduct representation before Polish commercial courts?”
The answer is decisive.
7. Transparency in Corporate and Transactional Work
As a PhD in commercial law, I have extensive experience in:
- company formation in Poland,
- drafting shareholder agreements,
- structuring M&A transactions,
- preparing investor agreements,
- designing joint venture frameworks.
I place particular emphasis on clarity of contractual provisions and transparent cooperation rules with clients. Many shareholder conflicts originate from ambiguous clauses drafted without anticipating dispute scenarios.
Preventive structuring is often more valuable than litigation.
8. Cultural Awareness in Dispute Resolution
Disputes are not only about statutes and procedural codes. They also concern negotiation culture.
Companies from Germany, Switzerland, the UK, France, Scandinavia, the US or Ukraine often differ in:
- risk tolerance,
- documentation standards,
- approach to settlement,
- internal decision-making dynamics.
Effective dispute resolution in Poland requires understanding these differences and aligning litigation strategy accordingly.
9. Practical Verification Checklist
Before hiring a Polish law firm, consider:
- Does the firm have real cross-border experience?
- Who will personally handle your case?
- Does the lawyer have litigation experience?
- Has the firm handled shareholder or joint venture disputes?
- Are costs and procedural risks explained transparently?
- Is the firm experienced in cross-border enforcement in Poland?
- Is communication direct and structured?
10. Common Mistakes Foreign Companies Make
- Selecting a firm solely based on brand size.
- Assuming all lawyers speak fluent English.
- Not verifying who actually conducts representation.
- Ignoring litigation experience.
- Contacting a lawyer too late.
- Failing to monitor registered address data in the KRS.
- Underestimating enforcement risks.
Avoiding these mistakes significantly improves your position in any commercial dispute in Poland.
Jakubiec & Partners – Your Trusted Partner Across Poland
We support international clients across major Polish business hubs. We offer clear, practical guidance tailored to SMEs investing, operating, or resolving disputes in Poland. Whether you are entering the Polish market, managing a shareholder conflict, or seeking to recover assets, we provide strategic legal representation grounded in experience and analytical precision.
Contact us today to discuss your business objectives in Poland or to schedule a strategic legal consultation. English speaking lawyer in Poland:
📩 kancelaria@jakubieciwspolnicy.pl
📞 536 270 935
You can read more about us here: https://jakubieciwspolnicy.pl/en/cross-border-commercial-disputes-in-poland-jakubiec-partners/
and here you see my text about shareholders disputes in three-person companies: https://jakubieciwspolnicy.pl/en/what-does-j-mearsheimer-teach-us-about-shareholders-conflicts/
FAQ – Foreign Companies and Legal Disputes in Poland
How long does commercial litigation in Poland usually take?
First-instance proceedings often last between 12 and 24 months, depending on complexity and evidentiary scope.
Can proceedings before Polish commercial courts be conducted in English?
Court proceedings are conducted in Polish. Documents in foreign languages require certified translations.
Can a foreign company sue in Poland without a Polish subsidiary?
Yes, if jurisdiction exists under EU regulations or applicable private international law rules.
How are foreign judgments enforced in Poland?
EU judgments are generally enforceable after formal recognition. Non-EU judgments require separate recognition proceedings before enforcement.
What are typical litigation costs?
Court fees are statutory and predictable. Legal fees depend on scope and complexity. A structured cost estimate should always be provided at the outset.
by dr Andrzej Jakubiec - adwokat, mediatorLEGAL SUPPORT FOR FOREIGN SMES OPERATING IN POLAND
We are english‑speaking lawyers in Poland. Jakubiec & Partners is a Polish law firm specializing in cross-border commercial disputes and strategic legal advisory for international SMEs operating in Poland. Based in Łódź, with a strong presence in Warsaw and representation capabilities throughout Poland, we advise and represent foreign entrepreneurs who require not only legal compliance, but also strategic clarity in a complex regulatory and negotiation environment. For 17 years, our founder has worked with approximately 60 foreign companies from, among others, the United Kingdom, Germany, Switzerland, France, and Turkey. We support international SMEs both in day-to-day corporate matters and in high-stakes commercial disputes before Polish courts and arbitration tribunals.
Who we help?
We support international SMEs that operate in Poland or are involved in commercial disputes with Polish counterparties.
Commercial Disputes and Strategic Legal Advisory in Poland
Our Practice Focuses On:
- Cross-border commercial disputes in Poland
- Strategic negotiation structuring in complex cross-border business conflicts
- Corporate advisory for foreign investors
- Commercial litigation, mediation, and asset recovery in Poland
- Risk mitigation and dispute prevention strategies
Business Entry, Operations & Growth
We assist foreign entrepreneurs in navigating the complexities of Polish business law, ensuring secure and compliant operations from day one.
Our services include:
Company Formation & Market Entry: Establishing subsidiaries, branches, and representative offices aligned with your long-term strategic objectives.
Corporate & Shareholder Matters: Advising on shareholder disputes, joint ventures, corporate governance issues, and internal restructuring.
Mergers, Acquisitions & Joint Investments: Legal support in negotiations concerning the acquisition of commercial companies, joint ventures, and strategic partnerships.
Commercial Real Estate: Legal due diligence, negotiation, and oversight of property acquisitions and commercial lease agreements.
Employment & Compliance: Drafting employment contracts, advising on HR policies, and ensuring compliance with Polish labor regulations.
We regularly advise foreign clients in payment disputes (claims for receivables), corporate conflicts, and strategic governance matters.
Cross-Border Disputes & Strategic Negotiations
For international companies facing disputes with Polish contractors, suppliers, shareholders, or business partners, we provide a structured and analytically grounded approach. Our firm has extensive experience in complex business negotiations, particularly in:
- Shareholder conflicts and disputes within joint ventures
- Deadlocks in strategic investment projects
- High-value commercial disagreements
Our founder previously served on the Supervisory Board of the Oscar-winning animation studio Se-ma-for Sp. z o.o.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Se-ma-for, representing a Swiss / British investor. This role required navigating sensitive cross-border corporate dynamics and investor protection issues.
In addition to a PhD in Commercial Law and postgraduate studies in Negotiation and Mediation (University of Warsaw): https://wpia.uw.edu.pl/pl/studia/studia-podyplomowe/podyplomowe-studia-negocjacji-mediacji-i-innych-alternatywnych-metod-rozwiazywania-sporow as well as Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology (University of Łódź), our founder completed the Cycle de Droit Comparé at Université Robert Schuman in Strasbourg: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Université_de_Strasbourg_III. He is currently undertaking advanced studies in behavioral analysis in Wrocław: https://sie.edu.pl/analiza-behawioralna/#Opis, focused on business and organizational conflict, further strengthening our analytical framework for understanding conflict dynamics.
Dr. Jakubiec is also a Certified Mediator. He is officially registered on the List of Permanent Mediators maintained by the President of the District Court in Łódź (official registry link).
What do we apply?
- Strategic negotiation structuring and conflict de-escalation techniques
- Analysis of counterpart’s behavioral patterns
- Litigation strategy aligned with business objectives
This interdisciplinary approach enables us to effectively manage negotiation stalemates and dispute escalation. We provide a long-term strategic perspective rather than focusing on a purely procedural one.
Our founder regularly publishes on negotiation dynamics, AI in disputes, and behavioral aspects of commercial conflict.
Furthermore, Dr. Jakubiec is the architect of the Coupled Confirmation Bias (CCB) framework. He developed this concept to explain the phenomenon of rapid dispute escalation observed in his practice. Particularly in scenarios where both parties utilize AI to interpret the counterparty’s intentions and design their own strategic moves. You can explore his in-depth analysis of CCB here: The Coupled Confirmation Bias
and CCB Part 2
Litigation, Arbitration & Asset Recovery in Poland
When litigation becomes necessary, we provide rigorous representation before Polish courts and arbitration tribunals.
Commercial Litigation in Poland: Representation in payment claims, contractual disputes, shareholder conflicts, and corporate litigation.
Mediation & Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Strategic mediation support aimed at preserving business value while resolving disputes efficiently.
Securing Transactions & Risk Mitigation: Preventing disputes before they arise through carefully structured contracts and enforcement planning.
Asset Tracing & Recovery in Poland: Identifying, securing, and recovering debtor assets within the Polish jurisdiction.
Enforcement Proceedings: Efficient navigation of enforcement mechanisms under Polish law to ensure successful recovery of claims.
Why International SMEs Choose Us in Poland?
Strategic Approach: Deep understanding of Polish enforcement mechanisms and procedural strategy.
Conflict Resolution: Experience in complex negotiation stalemates, particularly in shareholder and joint venture disputes.
Multilingual Communication Without Intermediaries: Direct legal support in English and French, with additional assistance in Russian.
Global Perspective: Cross-border experience gained through long-term cooperation with foreign investors and international SMEs.
Jakubiec & Partners – Your Trusted Partner Across Poland
We support international clients across major Polish business hubs. We offer clear, practical guidance tailored to SMEs investing, operating, or resolving disputes in Poland. Whether you are entering the Polish market, managing a shareholder conflict, or seeking to recover assets, we provide strategic legal representation grounded in experience and analytical precision.
Contact us today to discuss your business objectives in Poland or to schedule a strategic legal consultation:
📩 kancelaria@jakubieciwspolnicy.pl
📞 536 270 935
FAQ
1. Can a foreign company pursue a commercial claim against a Polish contractor?
Yes. Foreign SMEs can file commercial claims in Poland, and Polish courts regularly handle disputes involving international parties. We represent foreign companies throughout the entire process, from pre‑litigation strategy to enforcement.
2. How long does commercial litigation in Poland typically take?
Most commercial cases take between 8 and 18 months in the first instance, depending on complexity and the court’s workload. Well‑prepared filings and strategic case management can significantly shorten the timeline.
3. Can a foreign judgment be enforced in Poland?
Yes. Judgments from EU countries are enforceable under EU regulations, while judgments from non‑EU jurisdictions may require recognition by a Polish court. We handle both recognition and enforcement proceedings.
4. What documents are needed to start a dispute in Poland?
Typically: the contract, correspondence with the Polish counterparty, invoices, proof of delivery or performance, and any settlement attempts. We assist clients in preparing a complete evidentiary package.
5. Do you provide legal support directly in English or French?
Yes. We offer direct legal support in English and French, without intermediaries. We also provide assistance in Russian through a lawyer with a background in Russian philology.
6. Are out‑of‑court dispute resolution methods effective in Poland?
Yes. Our firm has extensive experience in resolving disputes through mediation and structured negotiation. We also represent clients in arbitration proceedings. These methods help avoid the natural risks of court litigation, reduce procedural costs, and typically lead to significantly faster outcomes.
by dr Andrzej Jakubiec - adwokat, mediatorSTUDY: AI AS A HIDDEN ALLY IN DISPUTES?
Below is a report from a study conducted in January 2026. We gathered information on how people use AI to analyze their disputes. The results proved to be very interesting.
AI’s Role in Disputes Report (January 2026): Hidden Advisor or Error Generator? What did we do?
We conducted a survey completed by 87 participants. This group included our clients, lawyers, mediators, and business leaders. It also involved psychologists and people from the fields of science and art. Consequently, this is not a nationally representative sample. However, it represents a group with high awareness of conflict essence. These individuals can critically evaluate their own reasoning.
I designed the survey myself. After its distribution, some participants provided technical feedback on the questions. I appreciate these comments. Therefore, I will include them in future studies. I certainly plan to conduct more research soon.
What was the focus of the AI survey?
The questions concerned general AI usage. We also focused on analyzing family, work, and business situations. This includes the stage before a formal dispute arises.
Furthermore, we asked about analyzing the other party’s intentions. This element is highly susceptible to the fundamental attribution error. When combined with AI hyper-alignment, it generates a so-called feedback loop. This is a confirmation trap that leads to tunnel vision.
Next, I asked about using AI to determine one’s own actions. I deliberately did not specify if this meant the first move or a reaction. However, the most important question concerned transparency. I asked if participants would inform the other side about using AI. Surprisingly, the respondents showed remarkable consistency here. The conclusions from this remain an open question.
The final two questions concerned trust in AI. Although they were similar, the results were intriguing. Trust in AI does not match the assessment of its objectivity. It seems we know AI is not objective, yet we tend to trust it.
How did the participants respond?
Below are the “raw” questions and answers.
Do you use AI LLM models?
(Blue – yes, red – no)
87 answers
Do you use AI’s LLM to analyze family, employment or business?
Which of these relationships do you use AI to analyze? Family, work, business, or other?
Do you use AI’s LLM to analyze the other party’s intentions?
(blue – yes, red – no)
Do you use AI to design your own moves in an dispute?
(blue – yes, red – no)
Would you inform the other side of the dispute that you are using AI to analyze and predict their behavior or prepare your own moves?
Do you trust artificial intelligence analyses?
(blue – yes, red – no, yellow – partly)
Is AI objective?
Analysis of the Responses
The vast majority of participants use AI. Certainly, they do so to varying degrees. Their topics of interest are also not the same. Nevertheless, the widespread use of language models is a fact.
Specifically, 43% of respondents use AI to analyze family or business situations. In my opinion, this is a high number. Interestingly, business analysis was the most common. Family situations were the least frequent. Meanwhile, 29% of people pointed to other areas. Here is a link to an article on AI in family disputes: [Link]
A significant majority (81%) did not try to determine the other party’s intentions via AI. Is this a high number? On the contrary, almost 20% of people do try. This means every fifth person is vulnerable to the AI feedback loop. AI tends to “agree” with the user, reinforcing their original bias.
Furthermore, 25% of respondents use AI to plan their moves in a dispute. This discrepancy with the previous question is interesting. Perhaps 5% of us use AI for planning without analyzing the other side’s intentions. It is unclear if these are the same participants. This might result from ignoring psychological aspects or simply focusing on the “matter” of the case.
Significantly, 80% of us would not inform the other side about using AI. Why is that? Do we consider it unfair, like “technological doping”? Perhaps we view it as a superstition and feel slightly ashamed. Or maybe we believe we have a technological advantage and want to keep this powerful weapon secret.
Do we trust AI?
The last two questions yielded astonishing results. While 75% of us use AI, 67% believe it is not objective. Why then do we use it? Perhaps to reinforce our own beliefs. After all, it feels good when technology says: “That’s a great idea, Andrzej!”. We might simply pretend not to see the lack of objectivity. Alternatively, we may feel that AI is biased, but it is “on our side.” This correlates with the fact that most respondents partially trust AI.
Conclusions
AI has become a common tool. It shapes our attitudes in many areas of life. Certainly, its influence is felt in the disputes we handle. Interestingly, we also see it in the analysis of the situation’s structure. This can lead to a desire to change the status quo. Consequently, it may even trigger the dispute itself.
My previous publications on AI in disputes
Below are links to articles regarding AI’s impact on dispute dynamics. I presented my original concept of Coupled Confirmation Bias (CCB) there. These texts include references to the latest research in prestigious journals. They cover psychology, technology, and the role of AI in creating tunnel vision.
I recommend a key article by Yiran Du: Confirmation Bias in Generative AI Chatbots. It analyzes confirmation bias mechanisms in AI models. You can read about the risks of this coupling here: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.09343?
I applied this research to situations where both parties use AI. One party’s actions, determined by their AI, become the input for the other party’s AI. This prompts a specific, often escalated response. This escalation seems particularly dangerous.
For those interested, here is the link to the English version of my article on CCB: https://jakubieciwspolnicy.pl/en/coupled-confirmation-bias-2/ and the main text in polish: https://jakubieciwspolnicy.pl/sprzezony-blad-konfirmacji/
Invitation to Cooperation
If you are a party to a dispute, you may need strategic advice. I and my team deal with more than just the law. We conduct negotiations based on psychology, economics, and behavioral analysis.
If you have experiences with AI in disputes, please contact us. We would love to hear your story. It might serve as valuable material for our research. We ensure full anonymity.
Email: kancelaria@jakubieciwspolnicy.pl
Phone: 536 270 935
by dr Andrzej Jakubiec - adwokat, mediatorAI and Tunnel Vision in Shareholder Disputes
What is the problem?
The Coupled Confirmation Bias is more and more often present in business disputes. I can see it even in my current practice. Sometimes, clients come to me with a ready-made plan. They have already consulted a language model about their company’s situation. They expect me to simply execute it. Conversations with them can be difficult. I feel a strong need to perform my job properly and investigate the situation. Some clients understand this. Others assume it is unnecessary because the case is already “assessed.” A few have even accused me of inflating costs. They claim AI has already done the work and provided a solution.
Confirmation bias clearly influences some clients’ attitudes. I manage to convince a portion of them. Others are surprised when I refuse to cooperate. Some are even outraged. One person accused me—before any substantive talk—that I don’t understand companies or negotiations. My ‘ignorance’ supposedly stemmed from my desire to read the articles of association. I also wanted to discuss the history of the partnership. Welcome to the AI era!
This article expands on thoughts I shared previously.
You can read that text first, but it is not mandatory. This article stands on its own.
Shareholder Disputes: Why Do We Seek Confirmation?
I have observed a natural tendency in shareholder disputes for years. People selectively choose facts that support their version of events. In psychology, this mechanism is called confirmation bias. We ignore information that contradicts our beliefs. Meanwhile, we overvalue evidence that confirms them.
Example: If we believe the Earth is flat, we interpret data to prove it. We ignore inconvenient facts or stretch others. Confirmation bias is not an accusation against anyone. It is a well-researched psychological phenomenon. It is good to be aware of it.
Psychologically, this is a defense mechanism. Its goal is to maintain cognitive consistency and reduce emotional tension. Intellectual anxiety does not serve most of us. We want to eliminate it.
In disputes, every party presents a “favorable” version. They select facts and make convenient assumptions. They weave these assumptions into a factual narrative. This happens at every level: from playground fights to international conflicts. In shareholder disputes, confirmation bias reveals itself with full force.
Until now, clients often came to me with a ready “diagnosis” and “treatment plan.” They sought a lawyer who would accept it as truth.
You can read more here:
Coupled Confirmation Bias in AI Interaction
What is Coupled Confirmation Bias? It is a mechanism where our initial beliefs are reinforced by AI interaction. The pattern looks like this:
- The user formulates a thesis (e.g., a belief about a partner’s dishonesty).
- The AI model generates a response that matches this assumption. It lacks the full history of the partnership. It does not distinguish between facts, assumptions, and interpretations. It wants to be “helpful,” so it usually confirms the user’s thesis.
- The user treats AI as an authority. This authority is strengthened after receiving confirmation.
- A feedback loop forms. It leads to even stronger convictions and a deeper cognitive tunnel.
- New forces arise. AI reinforces beliefs. The user acts decisively, “ennobled” by the confirmation. The conflict escalates.
AI models often state they are not lawyers. However, this has a counterproductive effect. Many users then look for lawyers who will confirm the AI’s conclusions. They use this as the main criterion for evaluating a lawyer’s competence. They will search until they find one.
In practice, AI acts like a “magnifying glass.” It amplifies our starting positions, regardless of their truth. We remove everything from our field of vision that contradicts the original thesis.
You can read more about this problem here: Ben Wang, Jiqun Liu, Cognitively Biased Users Interacting with Algorithmically Biased Results in Whole-Session Search on Debated Topics, https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3664190.3672520
Why Does AI Naturally Confirm Our Beliefs?
Language models do not “think” independently. Their answers come from the statistical prediction of words based on the prompt’s context. If a question suggests a specific interpretation, the model creates a consistent narrative. The user sees this as objective confirmation.
AI responses are internally consistent. They rarely contradict themselves. However, they are not always externally consistent or grounded in reality. They may lack true legal knowledge (not to be confused with legal regulations). At first glance, they look like expert statements. Only a professional can spot the errors or omissions that invalidate the suggested direction.
We call it hypercustomization. You can read about it: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/23794607251347020
Practical Consequences of Coupled Confirmation Bias for Partners and Negotiations: The Feedback Loop
Coupled confirmation bias can deepen negotiation difficulties. AI confirms one side’s assumptions, making it harder to understand the other side. But what if both partners use AI and coupled confirmation bias affects them both?
Consider what happens when the other party describes their subjective perspective to their own AI model. The model confirms its point of view and reinforces it. The influence on the user’s actions is significant. The second partner observes this with growing suspicion. His reaction will be to prepare for an attack, which may be strictly defensive or pre-emptively offensive. But he wants to be sure that his interpretation is correct. What will he do? He turns to his own chatbot, subjectively describing what he sees. Guess what kind of answer he receives? Yes…
The situation can spiral out of control. It resembles a chess match between two cheaters using computers. This is no longer a normal game.
Every partner subjectively interprets the “opponent’s” behavior. They feed this subjectivity to an AI. The AI confirms the “wickedness” of the other side and suggests radical solutions. When clients come to my office in this spiral, rational arguments often fail to reach them.
We have a clear example of coupled confirmation bias on both sides, which provokes a Feedback Loop! It is a security dilemma on steroids.
Human-AI Confirmation Bias in Scientific Research
My observations are confirmed by scientific research. Studies show that human-AI interactions can reinforce prejudices and false beliefs.
Last year has been published an article: “How human–AI feedback loops alter human perceptual, emotional and social judgements” (Nature Human Behaviour). The authors showed that AI confirming human assumptions strengthens perceptions and social ratings. Here’s the link: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-02077-2?
I also recommend the paper by Yiran Du: Confirmation Bias in Generative AI Chatbots. It analyzes these mechanisms in AI models and discusses the risks of this coupling: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.09343?
Another insightful text is Bias in the Loop: How Humans Evaluate AI-Generated Suggestions: The authors found that users accept wrong AI suggestions if they fit prior beliefs. However, effective collaboration depends on who evaluates the AI results and how the review process is organized. You can read it here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2509.08514
This mechanism is at the forefront of AI research. It is a clear example of how AI affects specific areas of life, such as negotiations.
Summary
Coupled Confirmation Bias is not a new cognitive bias; rather, together with tunnel thinking, it creates a new conflict dynamic in which AI meaningfully influences both the perception and the escalation of the conflict.
Coupled Confirmation Bias proves that AI is not a neutral arbiter. Our subjective biases can be reinforced in a feedback loop. In shareholder disputes, this leads to bad decisions and conflict escalation.
A lawyer’s role has never been just to confirm a client’s ideas. Today, we must go further. We must help some people regain contact with reality.
Everything depends on us. AI offers great possibilities. We can instruct it to be critical of our ideas. It can play devil’s advocate. It can find gaps in our reasoning or suggest alternative explanations. AI is excellent at eliminating the fundamental attribution error in business disputes. I wrote about it here: https://jakubieciwspolnicy.pl/podstawowy-blad-atrybucji-w-pracy-adwokata/
When a client brings AI-generated advice, I don’t get offended. I talk to them. I almost always review the material. Sometimes, a suggested solution is interesting and fresh.
Usually, I gain the client’s trust by explaining how language models work. I show them solutions I can legally defend. Sometimes, a client returns after a few days and says they finally trust me—because the AI eventually agreed with my reasoning. In light of the above, it is a bittersweet success.
If you need a lawyer who handles negotiations and shareholder disputes, feel free to contact me: 📧 kancelaria@jakubieciwspolnicy.pl 📞 +48 536 270 935 I will be happy to help!
by dr Andrzej Jakubiec - adwokat, mediatorWhat Does J. Mearsheimer Teach Us About Shareholders Conflicts?
From the beginning of my work as a business attorney, I observed a striking pattern. In companies with three partners, disputes arose more frequently than in firms with two or four partners. For a long time, I treated this as an interesting curiosity. That changed after I read John Mearsheimer’s The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. Why three-partner companies are statistically more prone to disputes? International political theories offer surprising insights into modern business partnerships. Specifically, Mearsheimer’s theory of offensive realism may explain why three-person structures face inherent instability. By understanding these structural dynamics, entrepreneurs can defuse conflicts before they destroy company value.
International Relations Theory in Business
Is instability of three-partner companies real? Business analysis often draws on theories originally developed to explain great-power politics. John Mearsheimer’s seminal work, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, presents a clear thesis. He says, that bipolar systems, consisting of two main actors, are significantly more stable than multipolar ones.
In a business context, this translates into the relative durability of companies with only two partners. In such a setup, each partner typically holds a clearly defined role and maintains a strong incentive to reach an agreement to ensure the venture’s survival.
The Third Partner as a Structural Risk Factor
Once a third partner is introduced, the situation becomes strategically complex. Over time, the third individual naturally begins to assess their relative position within the company hierarchy. Neutral events or private conversations may be misinterpreted as signs of a growing alignment between the other two, leading to a breakdown in trust.
As questions arise about the sense of further investing energy, trust, and capital, perceptions begin to shift. This change can radically alter internal loyalty and decision-making dynamics.
Can Mearsheimer’s Theory Explain Shareholder Conflicts?
But can a theory about nuclear powers really apply to a three-person tech startup? The short answer: surprisingly well. The issue is whether they can be used to analyze relationships between business partners. To begin, let us lay out his core arguments. These are:
Mearsheimer’s key arguments about why multipolar arrangements are unstable:
- Anarchy in the system – There is no central authority to enforce agreements or reassure participants. Each actor must rely on itself for security. This creates constant pressure to accumulate advantage and undermines stable trust.
- Offensive capabilities – All major actors possess power that can be used against others. This creates persistent incentives to increase power rather than rely on cooperation.
- Uncertainty about others’ intentions – Actors can never be fully certain about others’ motivations or future plans. As a result, they make worst-case assumptions that drive competitive behavior.
- Survival as the primary goal – Fear of being outcompeted or dominated shapes strategic behavior. Players seek relative advantage even at the cost of short-term cooperation.
- Power maximization behaviour – Actors do not stop seeking power once basic security is achieved. They continue accumulating power to prevent rivals from gaining advantage.
- Security competition becomes self-reinforcing – When one actor increases power, others respond in kind. This dynamic fuels escalation rather than long-term stability.
- Greater opportunities for miscalculation – Multipolar settings create shifting alliances and imbalances. These conditions increase the risk of misjudging intentions or capabilities, triggering conflict.
These assumptions and behavioral imperatives form the core of Mearsheimer’s offensive realism perspective.
Doesn’t this list sound eerily familiar?
When we consider interpersonal dynamics in small, closed settings like commercial partnerships, this list stops being abstract. Competing for relative advantage and mistrusting intentions often feels natural in tightly knit management groups. The same logic appears in global geopolitical systems.
If we consider the theoretical basis for such a conceptual transfer, it cannot be dismissed outright. At minimum, it functions as a legitimate intellectual exercise rather than a formal scientific claim. This framing is a thought experiment, not a strict scientific argument. Still, the parallels are striking and, I hope, clear.
The Security Dilemma at the Micro Level
This internal tension closely resembles the “security dilemma” applied on a micro scale. In this scenario, an increase in one party’s sense of security or influence triggers an instinctive fear in the others. Consequently, a partner may seek to weaken the rest of the group simply to strengthen their own position.
The desire to assume a destructive role—such as an informal judge or arbiter—often emerges. Historical precedents, such as the Roman triumvirates or the history of successor kingdoms following Charlemagne’s empire, confirm that these three-way arrangements are rarely durable.
In my mediation and advisory practice, conflicts in three-partner companies tend to escalate faster and more emotionally than in two-partner structures.
Strategic Consequences for the Company
Conflict escalation in a trio is usually faster and more destructive than in other configurations. As decision-making paralysis begins to erode the organization from within, partners often find themselves fighting each other more fiercely than they compete with the market.
Because you know your partners best, you are able to strike at their most sensitive points. Ultimately, vital energy is diverted into building internal coalitions instead of driving growth.
In real corporate disputes, this dynamic frequently leads to board paralysis, operational stagnation, or costly shareholder litigation.
Instability of three-partner companies. Why Three-Person Structures Are Worth Avoiding?
Companies with three partners are among the least stable business forms because the potential for unequal alliances—typically two versus one—is embedded in the very structure. Instead of creating synergy, the system often devolves into a continuous zero-sum game.
If you are planning a new company, a two-partner model is usually a safer strategic choice. Reading Mearsheimer is essential for any leader who wants to understand and mitigate these structural risks.
Scientific Foundations: Conflict Dynamics in Triads
To fully understand the risks, one must examine the mathematical and psychological frameworks governing three-party interactions.
Offensive Realism in Systems Without a Central Arbiter
A company’s management board often resembles an “anarchic” system. Without a dominant leader to enforce order, each actor must maximize their own power to ensure survival. In a triad, this logic produces a cycle of constant alliance reshuffling.
The Sociology of the Triad (Georg Simmel)
According to Georg Simmel, introducing a third person fundamentally changes group chemistry. Three distinct roles typically emerge: the mediator, the opportunist (tertius gaudens), and the dominator. This structural shift transforms simple cooperation into a complex struggle for influence.
The Physics of Intractable Conflicts
Modern sociophysical models suggest that three-group dynamics are inherently unstable. The human mind is wired to perceive coalition threats more acutely in triads, which often triggers defensive aggression and long-term instability.
Instability of three-partner companies. Key Sources on Three-Party Conflict Dynamics
The following materials provide a foundation for deeper risk analysis in three-partner companies:
- [PL] Jakubiec & Partners – Three Partners: When Conflict Is in the Air An analysis by Dr. Andrzej Jakubiec linking Mearsheimer’s theory with Polish company law.
- [US] John J. Mearsheimer – The Tragedy of Great Power Politics The foundation of offensive realism. Explains why actors in anarchic systems seek dominance.
- A study examining which coalition structures can form in three-player games. It analyzes the conditions under which players form two-player coalitions, a grand coalition, or act independently: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/16/3/30?
- Balanced Weights and Three‑Sided Coalition Formation (MDPI Games) https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/1/2/159
- Dynamic Stability of Coalition Formation in Dynamic Games: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167637724000749?via%3Dihub
- Hedonic Games and Coalition Stability: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonic_game?
Most shareholder disputes do not begin with bad intentions, but with structural blind spots that could have been addressed years earlier.
Prior to entering a three-person partnership, ensure your agreement includes provisions to mitigate structural deadlock. I invite you to reach out for a consultation:
📩 kancelaria@jakubieciwspolnicy.pl
📞 536 270 935
by dr Andrzej Jakubiec - adwokat, mediatorUsing AI in Disputes Between Partners
I handle corporate disputes, including conflicts between partners. I am also deeply interested in technology. Using AI to analyze conflicts is now a reality. It is also becoming a fact in disputes between partners. The question is how to use AI optimally in this field. We must also address the traps of using AI in this area. In this post, I want to mention a few of them.
What are partner disputes about?
AI in disputes between partners? Yes, but first, let’s define these disputes. Conflicts between partners are not just about money. Money plays a role, but rarely the leading one. Often, it is just a side issue. Partners sometimes fight each other more fiercely than their competitors. They have many tools and know each other well. This gives them a direct impact on each other’s lives.
What do partners fight about? They fight for power, agency, and vision. Also they seek appreciation and recognition. They also disagree on the pace of change or risk tolerance. Some disputes involve honesty, profit distribution, or hiring family members. Financing—loans versus own funds—is another common issue. In a three-partner setup, unequal coalitions often form. Three-person companies are among the least stable. I wrote more about it here: https://jakubieciwspolnicy.pl/trzech-wspolnikow-czyli-konflikt-wisi-w-powietrzu/
In this text (link up), I have applied an analytical framework developed by J. Mearsheimer in his book The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. In that seminal work, the author explains why international alliances among three states tend to be unstable. In my view, these conclusions can be cautiously extended to relationships between business partners.
How can AI be used in partner disputes?
AI is actually used to resolve disputes. You can read more about here: https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/artificial-intelligence-dispute-resolution-developments-challenges-perspectives-2025-07-11/ or here in litigation context: https://www.whitecase.com/insight-our-thinking/ai-risks-legal-sector-must-consider-dispute-resolution .
We see, that AI in disputes between partners in business can be used in many ways. New ideas appear constantly. We can group these into three categories:
- Preventive consultation: How to avoid a dispute?
- Interventional: How to resolve an existing dispute?
- Follow-up: How to improve the relationship for the future?
AI can provide general advice on cooperation or focus on a specific case. Both have pros and cons. AI is a great tool, but we must know how to use it.
General advice can offer a new perspective. It might suggest a solution you hadn’t considered. However, many general tips can be clichéd or simplistic. It is difficult to judge if these general “recommendations” apply to your specific case.
You can listen to more about using AI in conflict resolution here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=GO_cZ3NADZI&embeds_referring_euri=https%3A%2F%2Fjakubieciwspolnicy.pl%2F&source_ve_path=MzY4NDIsMjg2NjQsMjM4NTE
AI in Disputes Between Partners and The Coupled Confirmation Bias in AI
AI in partner disputes offers many possibilities. However, asking about a specific case—your company—carries a huge risk. I call this the “Coupled Confirmation Bias”. This is the tendency of AI to confirm our subjective opinions.
How does it work? To get a solution for a specific problem, you must provide data. You need to describe the situation. The problem is that your story is only a slice of reality. A great writer might need four volumes to describe your relationship. You are trying to do it in four sentences.
More importantly, we have a subjective view of reality. We describe it from our perspective. This is natural. We must acknowledge that our view is not the only one.
What does the AI do? Language models are not gods. They are advanced technology learning to talk to us. They do not have a monopoly on wisdom. An AI can give you 92 ways to solve a dispute in 10 seconds. But are they wise?
AI models tend to confirm your views unless they contradict facts. We are very good at telling stories that favor us. We omit “small details.” In this situation, the AI will tell you what you want to hear. It can easily radicalize your attitude. This is the Coupled Confirmation Bias.
AI in Disputes Between Partners. Want to know more?
Our subjective perspective is a natural trap. Research from the Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School confirms that egocentrism prevents objective assessment. This makes the input data for AI fragmentary.
If you are interested in AI in legal practice, you can also read this report: DRI White Paper on Artificial Intelligence.
Conclusions
Corporate disputes are complex. They involve law, economics, psychology, and negotiation. Usually, each participant sees only part of the puzzle. Their view is fragmentary and subjective. When telling the story, they select facts and add subjective value.
It takes great insight and experience to find what is valuable in such a story. Language models cannot do this yet.
It is worth testing ideas with AI. However, following AI advice blindly in specific cases is a grave mistake. You can fall into a spiral of confirmation. This turns doubts into delusions. We often trust what we don’t understand more than what we know.
Do you need help with partner relations? Are you in a legal dispute? Do you want to minimize the risk of future conflict? Contact us:
Jakubiec & Partners 📩 kancelaria@jakubieciwspolnicy.pl 📞 +48 536 270 935
We are here to help! If you enjoyed this article, you can read my other texts on AI in legal work:
by dr Andrzej Jakubiec - adwokat, mediatorHow to Resolve Disputes Between Partners?
Disputes between partners are a natural part of business. Differences in interest or visions for the company appear sooner or later. Personal tensions or financial crises also affect ownership relations. The key question is not if a conflict will arise. The question is how it will be resolved.
Escalation and Litigation – The Easy Way, But Is It Better?
Mediation between partners is often not the first choice. It requires courage, responsibility, and effort. The simplest path is often the most expensive: escalating the dispute to court. In practice, court cases often focus on “proxy” disputes. These concern formal or technical issues. They rarely address the real source of the conflict.
Why Do Court Proceedings Rarely Solve the Problem?
Litigation always generates high costs. These include money, time, and organizational resources. More importantly, it consumes assets that are hard to rebuild. These are relationships, trust, and the company’s reputation. Even a final court ruling does not remove the cause of conflict. It often leads to further escalation in other areas.
From a business perspective, this path rarely leads to a real solution.
Our Approach to Partner Disputes
The Law Firm of Jakubiec & Partners does not avoid confrontation when necessary. However, in most cases, we focus on real help for our clients. we do not mechanically generate new court proceedings.
We specialize in negotiations and actions that remove the source of the dispute. Our goal is to rebuild the relationship between partners. If that is impossible, we aim for a rational and predictable separation.
Negotiation as a Tool for Mature Conflict Management
Negotiation is not a sign of weakness. On the contrary, it shows maturity and strategic thinking. We often help clients who feel “trapped in a corner.” They often defend positions that do not reflect their true business goals.
A well-led negotiation process allows you to regain control. It limits losses and lets you focus on what matters most: growth and stability.
Mediation Between Partners – Want to Know More?
Mediation between partners is our specialty. We constantly develop our skills and study new sources. We are happy to share them with you.
You can read about alternatives to litigation here: Alternative Dispute Resolution (Harvard). The experts at Harvard University certainly know their field.
For a different perspective, I recommend this Forbes article: Strategic Mediation: Five Pillars for Effective Settlements. It explains how to use mediation in tough business disputes.
You can also read why leading American lawyers prefer mediation for business disputes here: Why Mediation is Preferred for Business Disputes.
If you want to read my previous articles, here are a few links:
- https://jakubieciwspolnicy.pl/wykorzystanie-ai-w-sporach-miedzy-wspolnikami/
- https://jakubieciwspolnicy.pl/wspolnik-mniejszosciowy-i-jego-los/
- https://jakubieciwspolnicy.pl/roznice-miedzy-mediacja-arbitrazem-a-postepowaniem-sadowym/
Would you rather listen than read? Here is a link to my podcast about partner disputes: https://open.spotify.com/episode/4p20ALoBzNcmzQ0W2otf0e
If you want to learn more about how we work and help partners in conflict, please contact our firm.
Jakubiec & Partners 📩 kancelaria@jakubieciwspolnicy.pl 📞 +48 536 270 935