by Redaktor | Nov 5, 2025 | news-en
NOTE: translated from Polish!
On 21 August 2025, the Provincial Administrative Court in Poznań issued a non-final judgment with reference number IV SA/Po 478/25, which refers to the legitimacy of the payment of childcare allowance to parents, especially in the context of alternating custody of a child. This judgment is of significant importance for families in which custody of the child is shared between both parents, which raises the question of how the concept of "shared custody" should be understood and how childcare benefits should be granted in such cases.
In the judgment in question, the Provincial Administrative Court in Poznań drew particular attention to the fact that the concept of "alternating custody" should be understood as a situation in which a child resides with both parents for an equal or almost equal part of the time. In such a case, both the mother and the father may have the right to apply for the childcare benefit, but with some reservations. The court emphasized that the decision to grant the benefit must depend on the actual provision of care, which means that the administrative authorities may make an individual assessment of the situation, taking into account documentation and evidence indicating the duration of actual care.
In the case of shared custody, one of the key issues is to determine which parent actually takes care of the child most of the time, because according to the law, the parent who has permanent or majority custody of the child is entitled to the childcare allowance. The court indicated that it is necessary for the parents to provide appropriate documentation confirming their involvement in the care of the child. This may include certificates from institutions such as schools, kindergartens, doctors, which indicate which of the parents the child has been with most of the time.
It follows that in a situation where the time of care is divided equally, it is possible that the childcare allowance will be granted to both parents, but in a proportionate amount. This means that if both parents have equal custody of the child, the childcare benefit may be divided between them, which in practice means the need to present appropriate evidence and certificates.
The judgment IV SA/Po 478/25 prompts reflection on the social realities of modern families, in which, after divorce or separation, parents decide to alternate custody of their children. On the one hand, such a situation is an expression of parents' care for equal participation in the upbringing of the child, on the other hand, it is associated with the need to take into account administrative issues, such as the granting of childcare benefits.
The judgment IV SA/Po 478/25 emphasizes that in the case of shared custody, the granting of the childcare allowance should be dependent on the actual division of care between the parents, which requires the provision of appropriate evidence. At the same time, this judgment points to the need for precise legal regulations that will allow for a more flexible and fair approach to the granting of benefits in such cases. Contemporary family realities, characterized by frequent divorces and separations, require the legal system to keep pace with social changes, providing support to both parents and children.
by Redaktor | Oct 15, 2025 | news-en
Note: translated from Polish.
Divorce is one of the most important institutions of family law, consisting in the formal termination of marriage by the court at the request of one or both spouses.
Undoubtedly, divorce between citizens of different countries, in this case between citizens of Polish and Turkey, can be a challenge, but once you are familiar with the basic procedures, the process can go smoothly and smoothly.
The termination of a marriage with a Turkish citizen is regulated by the Turkish Civil Code, as well as the Law on International Private
and Procedural Law (MÖHUK) and the Law – Private International Law.
It is worth noting that divorce can be carried out by agreement of the party or in an adversarial procedure.
An agreement between the parties in the context of divorce is feasible if the parties meet certain conditions:
- The parties must file for divorce or one of the parties agree to the divorce from the other party,
- The court must confirm that the parties' decision is conscious and voluntary,
- The marriage must last at least 1 year,
- An agreement between the parties must be reached at the level of property matters and matters related to their children.
The situation becomes a bit more complicated when one of the parties does not agree to the divorce or there are disputes about the terms of the divorce, you should file a petition for divorce in the adversarial procedure. The petition should be filed with the competent court due to the place of residence of one of the spouses or the last joint one before filing the lawsuit.
The issue of the law applicable to the divorce of spouses of different citizenship is regulated both by the provisions of the private international law of Turkey (MÖHUK) and by the Polish law – Private International Law. Fundamentally:
- If the spouses have a common residence, the law of that country applies.
- In the absence of a common residence, it is possible to apply the law of the native common citizenship, and if this is not possible, it is usually referred to the laws of the country with which the marriage is most closely connected.
In this context, there may be a proposal to apply Turkish law (in accordance with MÖHUK), however, Article 54 of the Polish Private International Law provides that: If the divorce or separation of the spouses cannot be decreed on the basis of the applicable law in accordance with the provisions of this Act, the Polish law shall apply. This means that if the application of Turkish law would lead to the impossibility of divorce, excessive formalities or violation of the fundamental principles of the legal order of the Republic of Poland, the court may depart from its application and rely on Polish law.
In practice, in many divorce cases with a Turkish element, heard by Polish courts, Polish law applies – especially when the action was brought by a Polish citizen and both spouses live in Poland.
In the light of Article 54 of the PPM, it is possible to defend the view that in the absence of a common place of residence, but when there are significant links with Poland (e.g. organized life in Poland), the court can and should apply Polish law, even if the normal conflict of law rules would point to Turkish law.
by Redaktor | Sep 1, 2025 | news-en
ATTENTION – THIS IS AN AUTOMATIC TRANSLATION
The Act of June 4, 2025, signed by the President on July 3, 2025 (effective from October 8, 2025), introduces a favorable change for divorced persons in the Family and Guardianship Code (Journal of Laws 2023, item 2809, hereinafter: FGC). The amendment concerns Article 59 FGC and extends the deadline for a divorced person to revert to their surname used before marriage.
According to the new wording of Article 59, within one year from the finalization of the divorce decree, a divorced spouse who changed their surname as a result of marriage may return to the surname used prior to marriage. To do this, an appropriate statement must be made before the head of the civil registry office or before a consul.
Previously, divorced persons had only three months to submit such a statement, and the deadline was strictly binding. Extending this period to one year gives divorced individuals more time to make a well-considered decision.
It is important to note that a statement to return to the surname used before marriage can only be made before the head of the civil registry office or before a consul, who will forward it to the relevant civil registry office. No other authority is authorized to accept such a statement, and the court cannot include such a provision in the divorce judgment.
This position was confirmed by the Supreme Court in its judgment of September 23, 1974, case no. III CRN 188/74: “A statement on this matter may, however, be made only before the head of the civil registry office (…) No other authority is authorized to accept such a statement. The court also cannot include such a provision in the divorce judgment itself.”
by Redaktor | Aug 13, 2025 | news-en
ATTENTION! Automatic translation from Polish
The Act of June 4, 2025, signed by the President on July 3, 2025 (entry into force: October 8, 2025), introduces a change to the Family and Guardianship Code (Journal of Laws of 2023, item 2809, hereinafter referred to as the Family and Guardianship Code) that is beneficial to divorcees. The amendment concerns Article 59 of the Family and Guardianship Code and extends the period within which a divorced person may revert to their pre-marital surname.
According to the new wording of Article 59 of the Family and Guardianship Code, within one year of the divorce decree becoming final, a divorced spouse who has changed their surname as a result of marriage may revert to their pre-marital surname. To do so, a declaration must be submitted to the head of the registry office or a consul. Previously, divorced persons had only three months to submit such a declaration, and this deadline was preclusive. Extending this period to one year gives divorced persons more time to make a considered decision.
It is worth remembering that a declaration of reversion to the surname used before marriage can only be submitted to the head of the civil registry office or to a consul, who will forward it to the appropriate head of the civil registry office. No other body is authorized to accept such a declaration, and the court cannot include a relevant ruling in the divorce decree.
This position was confirmed by the Supreme Court in its judgment of September 23, 1974, file reference III CRN 188/74: "However, she [the divorced wife] may submit a declaration in this matter only to the head of the civil registry office (...) No other body is authorized to accept the declaration. Nor can the court include such a ruling in the divorce decree itself."
by Redaktor | Jul 22, 2025 | news-en
ATTENTION ! automatic translation from Polish
According to the Supreme Court decision of March 11, 2025 (III USK 326/23), the maintenance obligation under Article 60 of the Family and Guardianship Code is limited in time and this aspect is of primary importance. Thus, if the obligated spouse is a divorced spouse who has not been found guilty of the breakdown of the marriage, this obligation expires if the spouse enters into a new marriage and after five years from the divorce decree, unless due to exceptional circumstances the court, at the request of the entitled person, extends the aforementioned five-year period (Article 60 § 3 of the Family and Guardianship Code).
The expiration of the maintenance obligation after five years from the divorce decree (Family Family and Guardianship Code) excludes the right to a family pension for the divorced spouse (as stated by the Supreme Court in its judgment of 29 July 2020, I UK 10/19, OSNP 2021 No. 4, item 45). Failure to obtain an extension of the five-year period referred to in Art. 60 § 3, second sentence, of the Family and Guardianship Code results in the expiration of the maintenance obligation of the divorced spouse, which means failure to meet one of the conditions necessary for granting a family pension, consisting in having the right to maintenance established by a court judgment or a court settlement on the day of the former husband's death (Art. 70 sec. 3 of the Pension Act). As a consequence, the expiry of the maintenance obligation (KRO) entails all the consequences that the law associates with the benefit of maintenance (see the Supreme Court decision of 17 February 2022, I USK 403/21, LEX No. 3402684).
by Redaktor | Jun 3, 2025 | news-en
ATTENTION!!! Automatic translation from Polish.
According to the draft of the Ministry of Justice of May 12, 2025 (Government Legislation Center list number: UDER24), the proceedings for the dissolution of marriage in Poland are facing a revolutionary change.
The drafter proposes to introduce a solution that will allow spouses to obtain a dissolution by submitting consistent statements before the head of the Civil Registry Office or before the Polish Consul (in the case of Polish citizens staying abroad).
The grounds for dissolving a marriage in this procedure were defined by the drafter as follows: complete and permanent breakdown of marriage, duration of the marriage longer than one year and no common minor children.
The effects of an extrajudicial divorce will be the same as a divorce obtained under the previous rules.
Importantly, an extrajudicial divorce produces the same effects as if neither spouse was at fault for the breakdown of marriage.
At the same time, a procedure enabling extrajudicial divorce has been provided for, as each of the spouses and the head of the registry office may file a request to invalidate an extrajudicial divorce if, at the time of submitting the declaration of dissolution of the marriage, the spouses had common minor children.
According to the draft, an action for invalidation of an extrajudicial divorce may also be filed by a spouse who, at the time of submitting the declaration of dissolution of the marriage, acted:
a) in a state that precluded conscious or free decision-making and expression of will;
b) under the influence of an unlawful threat from the other spouse or a third party, if it follows from the circumstances that the person submitting the declaration could have feared that he or she or another person was in serious personal or property danger;
c) under the influence of an error, caused deceitfully by the other spouse, justifying the assumption that if the spouse had not acted under the influence of error and had assessed the matter reasonably, he or she would not have submitted a declaration of dissolution of the marriage; the deceit of a third party is equivalent to the deceit of the other spouse, if the latter knew about the deceit. The time limit for filing this action for the annulment of an extrajudicial divorce is 6 months from the cessation of the above obstacles, but no later than 3 years from the submission of consistent declarations of dissolution of the marriage before the head of the Civil Registry Office or the consul.
A detailed procedure leading to the dissolution of the marriage before the head of the civil registry office has been provided for as part of the amendments to the Act of 28 November 2024 - the Law on Civil Status Records. In particular, attention should be paid to 2 amendments to this Act.
The head of the civil registry office cannot receive assurances from the spouses if a divorce case is pending between the spouses.
Spouses intending to dissolve the marriage through an extrajudicial divorce, simultaneously present, present identity documents to the head of the civil registry office or the consul and submit assurances in writing recorded in paper form confirming the existence of the grounds for an extrajudicial divorce.
The proposed change ensures the acceleration of the possibility of obtaining a divorce and relief of the courts, while meeting the conditions for obtaining a divorce in this procedure.
The deadline for completing the legislative work was set for the second quarter of 2025.
