ATTENTION – VERY IMPORTANT TK RULING: COVID provisions suspending the running of the limitation period are unconstitutional

According to the TC, the constitutional provisions were violated here in several elements. Firstly, as the TK noted, the regulation was not introduced in March 2020, i.e. during the initial period of the pandemic (which disorganised public life in an unprecedented manner), but only fifteen months after the outbreak in Poland. Secondly, the provision under examination contradicted the regulation of Article 44 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the fact that – despite the fact that the statute of limitations on the public debt had expired – it still maintained the punishability of the related offence. Thirdly, the suspension of the statute of limitations on the punishability of the act without indicating a specific date (despite even the expiry of the limitation period of the public-law receivable) translated into the fact that, while calming the epidemic situation, it exposed the entities concerned to legal consequences that could not have been foreseen earlier. The Court noted that new provisions enacted by the legislator cannot surprise their addressees as to the further conduct of the public authorities.

Importantly, the Constitutional Court emphasised that the legislator is free to shape the institution of the statute of limitations, however, the lack of specification of the maximum duration of the suspension due to the state of epidemic threat or the state of epidemic caused that the suspension of the course of the statute of limitations could persist for an indefinite period of time (even up to several years) and this regardless of the actual impact of sanitary restrictions on the ability of the procedural authorities to efficiently undertake actions. In addition, the fact of whether the running of the limitation period was suspended depended on the decision of the Minister of Health, who decided on the state of emergency.

What then are the implications of the CT ruling?

– The Court’s judgment removes the suspension of the limitation period in the scope in question from the legal system. This means that the provision did not operate in completed cases in which the provision under review was applied, which opens the way for taxpayers to resume proceedings, and in pending cases – it results in its disregard for adjudication and the application of general provisions regarding the running of the statute of limitations, explains Piotr Kalemba, tax adviser, director at Thedy & Partners.

Have you had or do you have such a case and want to take advantage of the latest TK ruling in practice? Please contact Piotr Kalemba.