Category: Poland

  • Former Gide Counsel Konrad Kosicki Joins Wolf Theiss Warsaw as Head of New Energy Practice

    Former Gide Counsel Konrad Kosicki Joins Wolf Theiss Warsaw as Head of New Energy Practice

    Former Gide Loyrette Nouel Counsel Konrad Kosicki has joined Wolf Theiss Warsaw to head its new Energy practice. 

    According to Wolf Theiss, “Kosicki advises clients in matters related to the acquisition, development and financing of conventional and renewable energy projects. His experience also includes work on infrastructure projects such as motorways and stadiums.”

    Kosicki spent from 2015 to 2019 at Gide. Before that he spent six years at Norton Rose Fulbright (and legacy Norton Rose) and a year at Squire Sanders. He received his Master’s in Law from the University of Warsaw in 2006 and a subsequent LL.M. from the University of Bremen in 2007.

    Also joining Wolf Theiss was new Counsel Maciej Olszewski.

    “We’re delighted to add these two talents to our outstanding team of legal experts,” said Tomasz Stasiak, Co-Managing Partner of Wolf Theiss’s Warsaw office. “Responding to growing demand from our international and domestic clients, we are strengthening our expertise in the energy sector and boosting our position to provide comprehensive advice for M&A transactions and private equity investments.”.

  • More Room for Sensitive Information

    Welcome corporate whistleblowers

    Recently we have seen a growing interest in issues relating to whistle-blower protection and its role in modern business. The main emphasis in the discussion about whistleblowers and their duties, rights and obligations was put on the individuals involved in whistle-blowing. It was also focused on creating mechanisms allowing individual whistleblowers to feel safe once they make their notification, either internally within the organization or externally with public authorities.

    However, it has to be noted that not only an individual can be a whistle-blower. In the Polish legal system, a number of regulations penalize individual and corporate behaviors and the list of such regulations is constantly growing.

    Troublesome discovery

    An important question is what happens when the discovery of compliance irregularity is a result of a regular internal audit carried out in the company and is not coming from an individual whistleblower? How should the company react when the discovered compliance problem happens to be a legal problem which may trigger regulatory or even criminal investigation? We hear those questions commonly asked in all types of corporate companies in all sectors. Often companies discuss also whether the company should file official notification. Companies even perform detailed risk assessments on how such notifications and further investigations can impact their business. From our experience the main reason of such questions is not the will to hide irregularities but fear of what will happen once the company self-reports.

    The biggest challenge for a company is to find itself in situation where the discovered problem is a common market mechanism used in other companies in the same sector. Filing a notification in such a situation may seem for some companies as an act of corporate suicide. However, if the company wants to continue business operations without a constant risk of regulatory or criminal investigation, reporting the irregularities is the only way to move forward.

    Keeping in mind problems and doubts that companies have when it comes to self-reporting, we believe that steps aimed at creating mechanisms protecting corporate whistleblowers are as much important as enhancing the protection of individual whistleblowers. As for now, the only operational leniency system protecting corporate whistleblowers in Poland is based on competition law but its application is limited to competition law violations only. If incentives for corporate whistleblowers, as well as their protection, would be guaranteed generally by the law, a large number of self-reporting doubts could be avoided. Especially, if the corporate whistleblower would know that reporting could give them some sort of protection or exclude from sanctions if the revealed irregularity was not known to the public authorities before.

    No bounty for self-reporting

    Currently, apart from the competition law, other binding regulations do not provide for any kind of benefits for a company acting as a whistle-blower in its own case. Reporting irregularities discovered within an organization or adopted throughout companies operating within a relevant sector does not lead to mitigation of risks of liability of any kind, including civil, administrative or even criminal (based on the Act on the Liability of Collective Companies for Punishable Offenses). Moreover, apart from the risk of liability imposed on a company, other side effects must be taken into consideration, consisting of dawn raids and inspections from prosecutor’s offices, police, tax offices or regulator. The Polish Criminal Code stipulates the means of mitigation of penalty or even excludes the possibility to impose punishment if the individual perpetrator reveals the details of an offense or accomplices. Nevertheless, there are no reflecting provisions relating to the actions of companies.

    Therefore the legislator’s plans to enact regulations which would protect a whistleblowing company or at least would allow it to be treated in a more favorable manner, should be recognized as a step in the right direction for our legal system. Such mechanisms were proposed in the last draft of the Act on Transparency in Public Life which allowed a company to avoid the imposition of multimillion fines if a company filed a notification of listed crimes before the inspection in this respect was commenced by the Central Anticorruption Bureau. That draft also provided for an extensive protection of whistleblowers notifying about specific crimes, including the protection for an entrepreneur, and also a company, if the notification concerned its business partner, but did not guarantee anonymity for such a whistle-blower.

    Likewise, the last draft of the new Act on the Liability of Collective Entities for Punishable Offenses provided for that a company was not a subject of liability, if it notified prosecuting agencies of a crime, disclosing relevant circumstances of its commitment, especially perpetrators or other companies acting as accomplices. The projected changes included also companies’ obligations to protect whistleblowers from retaliation, discrimination and other unjustified treatment.

    Conclusions

    Putting aside the doubts and criticism regarding the specific shape of the projected legislations, in our opinion it should be considered as a legislative step in the right direction. The Polish legal system lacks the provisions protecting proactive attitude of companies. Certainly, the drafts of new legal acts were not perfect and there might have been multiple controversies regarding their applications. However, the proposed changes would allow companies at least to compare the risks and advantages following from notifying about disclosed irregularities and violations. To date, the only ones assessed were risks as the advantages were almost imperceptible. One should hope that the legislation gap in this regard will be filled as soon as possible. We believe that change will come with the newly approved EU Directive on whistleblower protection which will need to be adopted by all EU Member States.

    The plans to enact regulations which would protect a whistleblowing company should be recognized as step in the right direction for our legal system. 

    By Dominika Wolf-Jezierska, Senior Associate, and Piotr Falarz, Senior Associate, DLA Piper

  • Domanski Zakrzewski Palinka to Advise on Polish Port Construction Project

    Domanski Zakrzewski Palinka to Advise on Polish Port Construction Project

    Domanski Zakrzewski Palinka is set to advise the Ministry of Investment and Development of Poland and the Zarzad Morskiego Porty Gdynia on the construction of an outdoor port in Gdynia, Poland.

    According to Domanski Zakrzewski Palinka, the firm will provide “comprehensive legal, economic, financial and technical advice in order to lead to the selection of a private partner for the implementation of the project.”

    The Domanski Zakrzewski Pakinka team will include Partners Marcin Krakowiak and Tomasz Darowski and Senior Associate Michal Przychoda.

    Editor’s note: On November 9, 2020, DZP informed CEE Legal Matters that “a contract notice was published, formally starting the procedure to select a private partner” for the project.

  • Weil Withdraws from Warsaw

    Weil Withdraws from Warsaw

    Weil, Gotshal & Manges has announced that it will be withdrawing from Poland, the firm’s last presence in Central and Eastern Europe, with the firm’s Warsaw-based partners to take over the business on January 1, 2020 and operating going forward as Rymarz Zdort.

    “Operating as Rymarz Zdort will give us more flexibility in aligning our strategy to the needs of the local market and will facilitate the adaptation of the firm’s profile to current market trends,” said Partner Pawel Rymarz. “We are very pleased with the terms agreed with Weil on which we are taking over the office’s operations; these arrangements will allow us to continue as before using the same technical and office resources.”

    According to a Rymarz Zdort press release, “apart from the new name, the change is a purely formal ownership transition, while all remaining aspects of its business activity, such as the range of legal services provided, the team, client engagements and even bank account numbers will remain unchanged and will not cause any complications on the operating level.”

    By withdrawing from Poland, and following the closure of its Budapest and Prague offices last year (as reported by CEE Legal Matters on January 18, 2019 and November 27, 2018, respectively) Weil is ending its presence in Central Europe.

    “Weil and its Warsaw partners have agreed that the Warsaw office will be spun out from Weil to be owned and operated by these partners as an independent firm,” said Weil Executive Partner Barry Wolf. “The Warsaw office will thus seamlessly continue its best-in-class legal practice in Poland. This evolution reflects the changing nature of the practice in Poland and will allow our Polish partners more freedom and flexibility. We anticipate referral of client work between Weil and this new Polish office, as appropriate, going forward. Over the years, our Warsaw office has been a leader in the region, involved in many significant transactions in Poland. We are very proud of all that our colleagues have achieved and we know they will continue to accomplish great things. We thank them for their many contributions to Weil and wish them all the best.” 

    “More than 25 years of working within a global structure of such a reputable service firm as Weil, Gotshal & Manges has been an invaluable time for building a broad range of skills and spearheading the use of bold and often innovative solutions on the Polish market,” said Partner Pawel Zdort. “Together, we have managed to create a firm whose attorneys have handled the largest and most high-profile M&A and ECM transactions in Poland; we are known for providing top-notch services, and this is a joint success for which we would like to thank our colleagues from the other Weil offices. As is the case with all sectors, there are times in a law firm’s life cycle when being in a partnership yields benefits and those when the partners reach the mutual conclusion that a new opening will be the best solution for both parties. Weil will pursue the strategy of focusing on markets where the network’s main global clients have a presence, while Rymarz Zdort will have more leeway in developing and expanding new departments and will be able to welcome new partners.”

  • Linklaters Advises Panattoni Europe on Lease for Sealed Air

    Linklaters Advises Panattoni Europe on Lease for Sealed Air

    Linklaters has helped Panattoni Europe negotiate the terms of a lease for logistics space consisting over 12,000 square meters in the Panattoni Business Center Lodz III with Sealed Air.

    The investment will be redeveloped into a factory for Sealed Air, which produces polyethylene foam packaging dedicated to secure fragile products during transportation. The building will cover 11,500 square meters of production, packaging and logistics space and 536 square meters of space for social and staff purposes.

    The Linklaters team included Senior Associate Zuzanna Lipska and Associate Patrycja Czarnecka.

    Linklaters did not reply to our inquiry on the matter.

  • CMS Advises CEE Equity Partners on Acquisition of Majority Stake in EuroWagon

    CMS Advises CEE Equity Partners on Acquisition of Majority Stake in EuroWagon

    CMS has advised CEE Equity Partners — the investment advisor to the China Central and Eastern Europe Investment Co-operation Fund II — on its acquisition of a majority stake in EuroWagon Sp. z o.o. Grant Thornton’s Poznan-based transaction advisory and legal arm advised the unidentified sellers.

    CMS describes EuroWagon as “the largest independent rolling stock leasing company (ROSCO) in Poland,” and reports that it “aims to develop into the dominant ROSCO in Central Eastern Europe through the expansion of its modern fleet of cargo wagons.” According to the firm, “the company’s clients include leading European railway operators, as well as blue-chip industrial clients.”

    CMS’s team was led by Partner Rafal Zwierz and included Senior Associate Olga Czyzycka and Associate Rafał Burda.

  • Crido Legal and DLA Piper Advise PZU Zdrowie on Acquisition of Polish Diagnostic Centers from Tar Heel Capital

    Crido Legal and DLA Piper Advise PZU Zdrowie on Acquisition of Polish Diagnostic Centers from Tar Heel Capital

    Crido Legal has advised PZU Zdrowie on the acquisition of 100% of the shares in Tomma Diagnostyka Obrazowa, a network of diagnostic centers, from the Tar Heel Capital private equity fund.

    The deal includes both Tomma Diagnostyka Obrazowa and its subsidiaries, Bonus Diagnosta and Asklepios Diagnostyka. As a result of the transaction, PZU Zdrowie will take over 35 diagnostic centers in Poland, giving it approximately 130 medical centers in all.

    The Crido Legal team was led by Partner Mateusz Rogozinski, supported by Associate Mateusz Walczak.

    DLA Piper’s team was supervised by Partner Jakub Marcinkowski and included Counsel Rafal Kluziak and Associates Michal Banasiak and Jakub Szczygiel.

  • Noerr Advises TAG Immobilien on Entrance into Poland

    Noerr Advises TAG Immobilien on Entrance into Poland

    Noerr has advised TAG Immobilien AG on its EUR 85 million acquisition of Vantage Development S.A., a real estate developer operating in Western Poland.

    Noerr’s Warsaw team included Partner Laurenz Wieneke, Associated Partners Radoslaw Biedecki and Ludomir Biedecki, and Associates Marek Solarski and Joanna Szacinska.

    Noerr did not reply to our inquiry on the matter.

  • Adam Brzezinski Promoted to Assistant General Counsel at MoneyGram in Warsaw

    Adam Brzezinski Promoted to Assistant General Counsel at MoneyGram in Warsaw

    Adam Brzezinski has been promoted to to Assistant General Counsel, Global Employment and European Privacy, with MoneyGram International in Warsaw.

    Brzezinski has been with MoneyGram since December 2014, when he joined as Legal Counsel. In June 2018 he was promoted to Senior Legal Counsel. Before joining the financial technology company he was in private practice with Mrowiec Fialek and Partners, Wardynski & Partners, Allen & Overy, and Dentons.

    “I am excited about the opportunity and thankful for the trust that the organization has put in me,” Brzezinski told CEE Legal Matters. “I intend to my best ensuring on-going GDPR compliance of the organization”

  • SPCG Successful for T-Mobile in Unfair Competition Dispute in Poland’s Supreme Court

    SPCG Successful for T-Mobile in Unfair Competition Dispute in Poland’s Supreme Court

    SPCG has persuaded Poland’s Supreme Court to dismiss a cassation complaint from the President of UOKiK (Poland’s competition authority) regarding the alleged anti-competitive agreement of telecommunications providers.

    According to SPCG, “by dismissing the cassation complaint of the President of UOKiK on October 31, 2019, the Supreme Court confirmed that the UOKiK decision issued in 2011 accusing, inter alia, T-Mobile Polska SA of participating in an alleged anti-competitive agreement of four telecommunications operators, and imposing a fine on TMPL, was erroneous and completely unjustified.”

    SPCG reports that UOKiK accused “four major telecommunications operators in Poland … [of agreeing to] reject the offer of Info-TV-FM Sp. z o. o. (ITF) for broadcast on their mobile TV networks in DVB-H technology. In 2009, a tender for frequency reservation was carried out, which was to enable the reception of television signals in mobile phones using the said technology. In this tender, won by ITF, the company competed with a consortium of four operators.”

    According to SPCG, “the decision of the President of UOKiK, which is unfavorable for operators, has been appealed, among others by TMPL, as a result of which it was revoked by the judgment of the Court of Competition and Consumer Protection (SOKiK) of 19.06.2015. The SOKiK judgment was upheld by the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Warsaw of March 15, 2017, from which the President of UOKiK filed a cassation appeal. It was this complaint that was dismissed by the Supreme Court on October 31, 2019.”

    The SPCG team representing T-Mobile SA was guided by Partner Slawomir Dudzik, supported by Senior Associate Jacek Budzik.