Kancelaria Radcy Prawnego Sylwia Szewczyk-Jankowska
Legal basis
- Ustawa z dnia 25 lutego 1964 r. – Kodeks rodzinny i opiekuńczy (Family and Guardianship Code; k.r.o.; consolidated text: Dz.U. 2026, poz. 236).
art. 56 § 1–3; art. 57 § 1–2; art. 58 § 1–3; art. 59; art. 60 § 1–3; art. 137 § 1.
Agreement alone does not establish the grounds
The court examines whether the marital relationship has broken down completely and permanently. It also considers statutory obstacles, particularly the welfare of the spouses’ minor children and principles of social coexistence. A shared wish to divorce does not replace that assessment. Agreement about fault does not guarantee one hearing or a particular completion date.
At both spouses’ request, the court refrains from deciding fault. The resulting legal effects are those applicable when neither spouse is at fault. This matters especially for maintenance between former spouses. It should therefore be an informed legal choice, rather than simply a way to seek a faster procedure.
Children need separate arrangements
The decree addresses parental responsibility for the spouses’ minor children, contact and each parent’s contribution to maintenance and upbringing. The court takes a written parental agreement into account if it serves the child’s welfare. At the parties’ joint request, it may refrain from ruling on contact. Parents still need workable arrangements in practice.
A useful agreement covers ordinary weeks, holidays, school breaks, health and school information, and expenses. Avoid copying a template that cannot work with actual working hours or travel distances. Financial arrangements require an assessment of the child’s needs and the parents’ earning and financial capacities.
Maintenance between former spouses
Following divorce without findings of fault, a former spouse in a state of need may claim support according to justified needs and the other spouse’s earning and financial capacities. This differs from the extended liability of a spouse found exclusively at fault under art. 60 § 2 k.r.o.
The obligation ends if the recipient remarries. Where the paying spouse was not found at fault, it also generally ends five years after divorce. Exceptional circumstances may justify a court extension at the recipient’s request. This five-year period concerns the duration of the obligation; it is not the limitation period for individual unpaid instalments.
Property, housing and documents
Divorce does not automatically divide matrimonial property. The court may divide it on request if this will not cause excessive delay. Disputed valuations, expenditure or liabilities may require separate proceedings. Divorce itself does not release either borrower from liability to a bank under a jointly signed loan agreement.
Prepare the marriage certificate, birth certificates for the spouses’ minor children, a record of their maintenance costs, income evidence and proposed arrangements. If the spouses still share a home, explain how it is used. Keep property and debt information together, while distinguishing the end of the marriage from a complete financial settlement.
Deadlines and changes of position
Maintenance claims are generally subject to a three-year limitation period, with the applicable rules on when limitation runs. The five-year period in art. 60 § 3 k.r.o. concerns expiry of the obligation, not limitation. Neither period replaces procedural deadlines specified in court notices.
Following the 2025 amendment, art. 59 k.r.o. allows one year from the divorce becoming final to declare a return to a former surname before the civil registrar or consul. This is a deadline for exercising a right, rather than limitation of a claim. Older decrees require checking transitional provisions. Separately, consent to omit findings of fault may be withdrawn during proceedings, including on appeal.
When to review the proposed agreement
Advice from a legal adviser (attorney-at-law) is useful before agreeing arrangements for children, abandoning maintenance claims or settling property issues. It is also helpful when positions change or one spouse has less information. An agreement should address the actual circumstances rather than merely appear consensual on paper.
For example, two hypothetical spouses may agree to divorce but understand holiday expenses for their child differently. Recording the allocation of costs and exceptions before the hearing can reduce later disagreement. The purpose of a legal review is an informed decision; it cannot guarantee how the court will decide the case or how long proceedings will take.
Supreme Court of Poland case law
Resolution of the Supreme Court of Poland of 24 November 2006, III CZP 106/06 (three judges).
A spouse may withdraw in an appeal an earlier request for the court to refrain from deciding fault. Agreement at the outset therefore does not guarantee that both spouses will maintain that position throughout the proceedings.
Case law source (Supreme Court, PDF)This article is for information only. It is not legal advice or an offer. An individual matter requires a review of its facts, documents and applicable provisions.