Introduction
Proceedings concluded with a final decision are subject to reopening in cases where that decision is vitiated by defects specified in the law, resulting in particular from the manner in which the proceedings were conducted.
Proceedings concluded by certain final orders are also subject to reopening. This refers to orders that are subject to appeal, as well as orders by an appellate body finding that the deadline for filing an appeal or a complaint has been missed, or finding that an appeal or complaint is inadmissible. It is also possible to reopen proceedings concluded by tacit disposition of the case.
The reopening of proceedings results in the initiation of proceedings whose purpose is simultaneously:
- determining whether there is a basis for reopening (a defect in the decision) and
- in the event of the contested decision being overturned—a new resolution of the matter already resolved by that final decision.
Provisions
- Articles 122g, 126, and 145–152 of the Act of June 14, 1960—Code of Administrative Procedure.
Detailed explanation
Circumstances under which proceedings are resumed
Proceedings concluded by a final decision are reopened when:
- the evidence on which the facts relevant to the case were based has proven to be false*;
- the decision was issued as a result of a criminal offense*;
- the decision was issued by an employee or public administration body subject to recusal;
- a party did not participate in the proceedings through no fault of their own;
- significant new factual circumstances or new evidence existing on the date the decision was issued, unknown to the authority that issued the decision, come to light;
- the decision was issued without obtaining the legally required position of another authority (opinion, consent, position in another form);
- a preliminary issue has been resolved by the competent authority or court in a manner differing from the assessment made when the decision was issued (in the case specified in Article 100 § 2 of the Code of Administrative Procedure);
- the decision was issued based on another decision or court ruling that was subsequently overturned or amended;
- the Constitutional Tribunal has ruled that the normative act on which the decision was based is inconsistent with the Constitution, an international treaty, or a statute;
- a ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union has been issued that affects the content of the decision;
- a court ruling has been issued finding a violation of the principle of equal treatment, in accordance with the Act of December 3, 2010, on the implementation of certain European Union provisions regarding equal treatment (Journal of Laws of 2025, item 1452), if the violation of this principle affected the resolution of the case concluded by a final decision.
|
In the case of the first two grounds (*) for reopening proceedings, proceedings may also be reopened:
|
How to initiate the procedure
Reopening of proceedings ex officio or at the request of a party. Reopening of proceedings for reasons related to a party’s failure to participate in the proceedings through no fault of their own, a ruling of the Constitutional Tribunal, a ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union, or a court ruling finding a violation of the principle of equal treatment may occur only at the request of a party.
A request for the reopening of proceedings must be filed within one month with the public administration body that issued the decision in the first instance.
This period is calculated from the date:
- on which the party became aware of the decision—in the case of a ground for reopening proceedings related to the party’s failure to participate in the proceedings through no fault of their own;
- the entry into force of the Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling;
- the publication of the operative part of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union;
- the court ruling finding a violation of the principle of equal treatment becomes final;
- the date on which the party became aware of the grounds for reopening the proceedings – in all other cases.
 |
Failure to meet this deadline will result in the proceedings not being able to be reopened. |
Form and Effects of the Reopening of Proceedings
Proceedings are reopened by way of an order, and a refusal to reopen proceedings is issued by way of an order, against which an appeal may be filed.
The reopening of proceedings by way of an order results in the initiation of proceedings aimed at determining the existence of grounds for reopening and, if applicable, resolving the case on its merits.
The competent authority to conduct these proceedings is the authority that issued the final decision in the case. If the grounds for reopening the proceedings are related to the actions of the authority that issued the final decision, the higher-level authority decides on the reopening of the proceedings and simultaneously designates the authority competent to conduct the proceedings. If the final decision was issued by a minister or a local government appeals board, that authority is competent to conduct the proceedings.
|
Example: If the Head of the Office for Foreigners issued a decision upholding the provincial governor’s decision to refuse a temporary residence permit, and a motion to reopen the proceedings in this case is filed, the authority competent to issue a ruling on the reopening of the proceedings and to conduct the proceedings themselves will be the Head of the Office for Foreigners, as the authority that is a minister within the meaning of Article 5 § 2(4) of the Code of Administrative Procedure. |
If the grounds for reopening the proceedings concern the falsification of evidence or the issuance of a decision as a result of a criminal offense, the final decision cannot be revoked as a result of the reopening of the proceedings if 10 years have elapsed since the date of its delivery or announcement.
In other cases of grounds for reopening, the decision cannot be revoked if 5 years have elapsed since its delivery or announcement. Furthermore, a decision is not revoked as a result of the reopening of proceedings if only a decision corresponding in substance to the previous decision could be issued.
As a result of proceedings initiated following a decision to reopen the case, the competent authority may issue the following rulings:
- a decision refusing to revoke the final decision—if it is determined that there are no grounds for reopening the proceedings;
- a decision to revoke the final decision and to resolve the case on its merits—if grounds for reopening are found to exist;
- a decision finding that the final decision was issued in violation of the law—if grounds for reopening are found, but the 10-yearor 5-year period preventing the revocation of the final decision, or with a simultaneous finding that a decision corresponding in substance to the existing final decision would have been issued.
In the latter case, the final decision is not revoked. It is merely determined that it is defective.
In cases where proceedings concluded with a final decision are subject to reopening, a ruling is issued in the proceedings initiated as a result of the issuance of the order to reopen the proceedings, rather than a decision.
Suspension of Enforcement of a Final Decision
During proceedings initiated by an order to reopen proceedings, it is possible to suspend the enforcement of a final decision. The prerequisite for issuing such an order is that there is a likelihood that the decision will be revoked as a result of the reopening of proceedings.
An order in this matter is subject to appeal, unless it was issued by a minister within the meaning of Article 5 § 2(4) of the Code of Administrative Procedure or by a local government appeals board.
