Company car in companies with Estonian CIT subject to lump sum taxation on company income

In accordance with Article 136(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, which comes into force in July, traders registered with the CEIDG who are parties to court proceedings are required to notify the court each time their address for service changes. This is similar to the situation of entities entered in the National Court Register (KRS), which have also had (and of course continue to have) such an obligation to date.

The amendment to the Code of Civil Procedure also introduces a new § 21 into the aforementioned Article 139, which reads as follows: “If the first document in the case cannot be served on a party who is an entrepreneur entered in the Central Register and Information on Economic Activity in the manner provided for in the preceding articles or in § 1 due to a failure to disclose a change of address for service in that register, the document shall be served at the address where the party resides. Where it is necessary to serve a document on a party in the manner provided for in Article 1391, the costs of service shall be borne by that party, regardless of the outcome of the case.” This means that sole traders will have to immediately update their address for service in the register. Failure to do so will result in an attempt to serve the document at their residential address, which will then be deemed to have been served.

Until now, Article 139(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure provided for the effect of service of a document only in respect of entities entered in the National Court Register. If the court cannot serve the correspondence, it places the document in the case file with the effect of service – unless it knows the company’s new address and can attempt service using the new details. However, this did not apply to entrepreneurs entered in the CEIDG.

Currently, if an entrepreneur’s correspondence address has not been updated and it is not possible to serve them with a document, the court will attempt to send it to their residential address. In the event that the correspondence is not collected, the effect will be the same as for entities entered in the National Court Register (KRS) – that is, the document will be placed in the case file with the effect of service. The court should instruct the party of the above when making the first attempt at service.

It should therefore be emphasised that, in the event of a failure to fulfil the obligation to update the new address in the CEIDG and a failure to inform the court of this change, a court document addressed to such an entrepreneur will ultimately be deemed to have been served. Consequently, the time limits within which a party may take procedural steps will commence. The relevant provisions will apply to cases brought before the courts from 1 July 2023.

Author

Mateusz Kowalski

Radca prawny, Senior Associate

I specialize in Polish tax law, particularly income taxes, as well as international tax law. My experience includes, among others. providing ongoing tax advisory services, preparing legal and tax opinions, drafting requests for individual interpretations, conducting tax reviews. I gained professional experience in Warsaw law firms.

View profile →