Dispute with NCBiR successfully concluded for law firm client

NCBiR’s allegations and their basis

NCBiR indicated that the basis for the termination of the contract and the demand for reimbursement was the alleged submission of a false statement by the beneficiary regarding the fulfillment of the conditions necessary for obtaining the grant. However, analysis of the data showed that the possible failure was entirely marginal and resulted from an insignificant technical discrepancy that arose after the required documents had already been submitted. In subsequent months, the settlements confirmed that the discrepancy was purely technical, incidental and completely without fault. Such an insignificant discrepancy could not constitute grounds for assuming that the beneficiary acted in a manner that misled the authority, let alone justify NCBiR’s rescission of its declaration of intent to conclude the contract.

Legal argumentation of the law firm

Acting on behalf of the client, the Law Firm presented NCBiR with a detailed argumentation, which demonstrated the lack of any basis for formulating charges against the beneficiary and the gross disproportionality of the demand for reimbursement of the grant. We stressed that the imposition of a sanction involving repayment of the full value of the support would be completely disproportionate to the scale of the failure, which would violate the principle of proportionality under national and EU law, as well as being in conflict with established case law, including the By the judgment of the Supreme Court of October 7, 2015. (I CSK 878/14) . We also pointed out that any doubts arising in the background of the project’s implementation should first be resolved in dialogue and with the cooperation of the parties, and not through unilateral actions of a ruling nature, especially when they concern issues of marginal importance. Our argument was further bolstered by an analysis of economic realities, including widespread problems for entrepreneurs in settling contributions after the introduction of the so-called “Polish Deal” and frequent adjustments and automatic offsets in the Social Security system, which fostered technical, non-fault errors.

Effects of actions and protection of customer interests

The actions taken successfully challenged the legitimacy of NCBiR’s position and led to its change. Thanks to the arguments presented and the substantive support of the Firm’s legal team, the client avoided the obligation to repay the funds and was able to continue implementing the R&D project. The company, which operates in the field of aviation and new technologies, entered the competition with the full intention of conducting the project in a reliable and efficient manner. It provided complete documentation to the best of its knowledge, and once the contract was concluded, it conducted the project with due diligence, properly accounting for the funds and developing its innovation, infrastructure and employment activities. An incidental technical lapse in billing – promptly compensated for – could not undermine her credibility or ability to carry out the project. Even less could it justify claims for reimbursement of funds, the fulfillment of which would result in serious, unwarranted consequences, such as halting research, reducing employment or stunting technological development.

The importance of the case and its implications

Settlement of the dispute at this stage avoided serious business consequences, including destabilization of operations and loss of jobs, and prevented the halting of work on an innovative solution of significant importance to the development of the aviation sector. This case is an example of effective protection of the beneficiaries of public funds when the actions of public institutions are taken without a proper assessment of the proportionality and real materiality of the alleged misconduct. It also shows that a careful, comprehensive and precisely prepared legal argumentation can effectively protect the interests of entrepreneurs implementing key research and development projects in Poland.

The law firm’s team responsible for handling the case

The following were responsible for handling the case on the law firm’s side:

• Damian Wojnowski, LL.M. – Partner,
• Attorney Zuzanna Bokina-Kiełbasa – Legal Counsel, Managing Associate Corporate&Energy Team,
• Martyna Dobkowska-Pragacz – Attorney Trainee, Associate