Introduction

In this contribution I present selected issues regarding the preclusion of untimely allegations and evidence in civil proceedings. In other words, this contribution deals with the doctrine of concentration of procedural material, as it is called in Poland. In the background there are inherent internal tensions between two key values of adjudication, namely, efficiency, on the one hand, and the reliability of the factual inquiry, on the other. I will carry out my presentation by mixing a healthy concoction of doctrine, law and practical observations. One caveat is in order, however. Given the limited space and the sheer size of the subject of inquiry, some readers may find this article a bit general. Although a side effect, this should be in fact beneficial for a foreign reader, as a meticulous discussion might have been too abstract and too detailed for comparative purposes.

I start with a brief characterization of the Polish system of procedure, including the still powerful dogma of truth-seeking. After a short historical comment on the principle of concentration, I move to the recent ‘ugly past’ and ‘the bright future’ ahead in light of recent amendments to the Polish Code of Civil Procedure (CCP). I conclude with some thoughts on the new law.

The Polish Model of Procedure: A View from Above

I would like to start by making two points.

First, although it does not perfectly match Damaška's model, I would argue that the Polish system is a type of ‘social’ or ‘policy-implementing’ model of procedure.

Theoretically, this model has the following characteristics: (1) as a part of its function, the active state has adopted a certain idea of how a ‘good society’ should work; (2) a civil dispute is a social problem, because it disrupts the orderly workings of society; (3) so, the state needs to be actively involved in adjudication, should it be invoked; (4) accordingly, adjudication is about more than merely resolving civil disputes; it is also about that idea of social order; (5) thus, the lawmaker infuses procedural norms with substantive policies; (6) because otherwise these policies will remain on paper and the primary goal of civil proceedings is to make correct factual findings, which is a conditio sine qua non for giving a proper judgment.