The subject of this commentary is an analysis and assessment of the decision of the Supreme Court of 19 March 2023, III CZ 427/22, which addresses the effects of the unauthorized electronic filing of a pleading in civil proceedings. In the commented decision, the Supreme Court adopted a position partially diverging from that previously expressed in its resolution of 23 May 2012, III CZP 9/12, which has since become established in judicial practice. In particular, the Supreme Court held that filing a pleading electronically in circumstances not provided for in specific provisions does not give rise to an obligation on the part of the court to undertake either factual actions (such as printing the document) or procedural actions (such as requesting that formal deficiencies be remedied by signing the pleading). This approving commentary aims to demonstrate the validity of the position adopted by the Supreme Court, while at the same time identifying the risks associated with an alternative practice.

This article is devoted to the analysis of the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure regulating the issue of delivery of letters to parties with the status of entrepreneurs. The analysis covers mainly regulations that allow for placing letters addressed to entrepreneurs on files with the effect of having been served. The need to address the above-mentioned issue is related to the changes introduced in this area by the extensive amendment to the Code of Civil Procedure made under the Act of 9 March 2023. Significant changes concern situations where the address for service provided in the Central Register and Information on Economic Activity does not correspond to reality due to the fact that the change of address has not been disclosed in this register. The purpose of this article is, in particular, to analyse and evaluate these changes, as well as to present proposals for a proper regulation of the effects of not updating the address provided in the register.

On 5 October 2021, the provisions of the Act of 18 November 2020 on electronic delivery came into force. This act defines the rules of correspondence with public entities in a manner consistent with the standards indicated in the so-called eIDAS regulation. The correspondence exchange system with the participation of public entities provided for in this Act will affect all court proceedings, including civil proceedings. The purpose of this study is to analyse the use of this system in relation to entrepreneurs participating in civil proceedings. Entrepreneurs registered in the Register of Entrepreneurs of the National Court Register or in the Central Register and Information on Economic Activity have been obliged to have an address for electronic delivery entered in the electronic addresses database and thus have been subjected to obligatory electronic delivery in civil proceedings. In connection with the above, the author of the article analyses in particular the obligation to receive court correspondence electronically and the obligation to obtain an electronic service address for this purpose, as well as the methods and the time frame for the implementation of these obligations.