Liability of management board members

20 May 2024 | Knowledge, News, The Right Focus

The liability of management board members is a complex and multifaceted issue, as it can be considered from different perspectives, i.e.:

  • What actions result in liability – a company’s debts and damage
  • Towards whom does it exist – creditors, the company itself or public authorities
  • What are the potential consequences – financial, criminal consequences and a prohibition from holding office

It is therefore worth taking a closer look at these issues, especially in light of recent developments.

Liability to company creditors

According to Article 299 of the Companies & Partnerships Code, it is management board members – when it comes to limited liability companies – that are liable in person for private debts.

In the case of joint-stock companies, however, Article 21 of the Bankruptcy Law provides that the management board may be held liable for damage caused by failure to file for bankruptcy in due time. It should be remembered that there is a presumption of fault in this respect, which may be rebutted in proceedings for taking of evidence.

Importantly, failure to file for bankruptcy in a timely manner may result in a ban of up to 10 years on conducting business or holding certain positions, including management or supervisory board positions.

In addition, pursuant to Article 291 of the Companies & Partnerships Code, management board members may also be held liable for making false statements to the National Court Register, i.e. that contributions by all shareholders or contributions to increased share capital have been made in full. The liability period is then three years from the date of the company’s or the capital increase’s registration, respectively. Importantly, management board members are liable regardless of whether they have intentionally or negligently provided false information and it is also irrelevant whether the damage was caused to the company or its creditors.

Pursuant to Article 175 of the Companies & Partnerships Code, management board members who, at the time of the company’s registration, were aware on the date of the Articles of Association that the value of in-kind contributions had been significantly overstated are also jointly and severally liable with the shareholder making such a contribution to compensate the company for the missing value and cannot be released from this obligation.

Articles 293 and 483 of the Companies & Partnerships Code should also be mentioned when discussing the liability of management board members, who are also liable for damage caused by an act or negligence contrary to the law or the company’s Articles of Association, unless they are not at fault.

A claim for damages must be brought within 3 years of the date on which the company became aware of the damage and the person who caused it, but no later than 10 years after the unlawful act or negligence of the management board member. In the above situation, there is a presumption of fault on the part of the board member.

Business Judgement Rule

Of particular note is the 2022 amendment to the Companies & Partnerships Code, introducing the Business Judgement Rule and the interest of groups of companies.

The Business Judgement Rule means that the actions of management board members should not be judged on the basis of results, but on the correctness of the decision-making process. There can therefore be no liability of a board member in a situation of so-called legitimate business risk.

On the other hand, the Code provides for the civil, criminal and organisational liability of management board members in the event of acts contrary to the interests of a group of companies or an unlawful instruction from a parent company. It is also important to consider liability under other norms and the invalidity of an unlawful instruction.

We have written more about the Business Judgement Rule and the interest of a group of companies here.

Liability for tax and administrative arrears

Another point worth mentioning is the liability for a company’s tax arrears. In the event of ineffective enforcement, management board members are jointly and severally liable with all their assets. It should also be noted that in this case, it is not necessary to go to court and that the issuance of an appropriate decision is sufficient. The same procedure applies to social security liabilities.

On the other hand, if the company does not fulfil its administrative obligations, the legislation provides for the possibility of imposing a penalty on its management board members:

  • By the UOKiK President, up to PLN 2 million if anti-competitive agreements have been concluded
  • By the KNF on the issuer

Current regulatory trends should also be noted:

  • Liability of the management board for the implementation and quality of technical and organisational solutions under the NIS2 Directive
  • Sanctions for failure to establish an internal notification procedure
  • Establishment of such a procedure in any material violation of the Whistleblower Protection Act

Individual and collective criminal liability

From 1 October 2023, harsher penalties have been applied to white-collar crimes, in particular:

  • Mismanagement or abuse of trust
  • Money laundering (including smurfing, mixing, and transfer pricing)
  • Managerial bribery
  • Unreliable accounting

In addition, the following crimes are considered felonies:

  • If the value of damage or assets is between PLN 5 million and PLN 10 million, liable parties may receive 3 to 20 years’ imprisonment
  • If the value of damage or assets exceeds PLN 10 million, liable parties may receive 5 to 25 years’ imprisonment

Other crimes against economic and property interests in civil law transactions include:

  • Financial fraud
  • Failure to satisfy a creditor’s claims
  • Acting to the detriment of creditors
  • Favouring creditors
  • Unreliable record keeping

As regards ‘collective’ criminal liability, the starting point is the Act on the Liability of Collective Entities for Punishable Offences.

The conditions for holding a company criminally liable are as follows:

  • Committing one of the listed prohibited acts
  • Commitment of such an act by an individual related to the company (e.g. a management board member, an employee)
  • The company benefiting or being able to benefit from crime
  • Conviction of a direct perpetrator (with exceptions),
  • Guilt of a collective entity for committing a prohibited act

An exhaustive list of crimes or fiscal offences for which the company may be held liable includes:

  • Environmental offences
  • Offences against economic transactions
  • Falsification of a document or use of a falsified document
  • Misrepresentation in a document
  • Fraud
  • Tax evasion

These are subject to:

  • A fine of up to PLN 5 million
  • Forfeiture
  • Specific prohibitions

Environmental offences

In the context of growing environmental awareness, it is worth recalling that management board members may also be held liable for environmental offences.

Chapter XII of the Criminal Code lists, inter alia, the following offences:

  • Destruction of the natural environment
  • Pollution of water, air or land
  • Improper storage, treatment or transport of waste

This type of offence is punishable by up to 10 years’ imprisonment, but if it results in a fatality or serious injury to a number of people, 20 years’ imprisonment may be imposed.

Liability for unintentional acts is also foreseen, with environmental offences being also covered by specific statutes.

Given this high level of liability for management board members and the rigour applicable to them, mitigating measures are becoming increasingly important. These include:

  • Obtaining professional advice on key decisions (part of the Business Judgement Rule)
  • Division of responsibilities among management board members
  • Implementation of corporate governance
  • Obtaining discharge

Other solutions include, for example, D&O insurance, indemnity agreements (indemnification, hold harmless letters), acting on the basis of a specific resolution of the supervisory or ownership body, and corporate compliance.

It is therefore a good idea to have proven advisers on your side, so that running a company becomes less risky and more business-oriented.

Questions? Contact us

 

Latest Knowledge

Announcement of Income Tax Reform

On 19 August, during a press conference, the Prime Minister announced a package of tax changes planned for next year. According to the announcement, the reform is intended, on the one hand, to ease the burden on the middle class and, on the other, to shift a greater fiscal burden onto the wealthiest individuals and the largest companies. We take a look at the proposals included in the announced package and explain what they might mean for taxpayers.

Family foundations and the tax authorities: what draft bill UD447 proposes and why this is not the end of the troubles

Family foundations were intended to provide entrepreneurs with a stable framework for intergenerational wealth management. Yet not even four years have passed since the first such foundations were established, and the rules governing their taxation are set to be changed once again. This is because the scale of interest and the practical problems uncovered have overwhelmed the drafters of the legislation, as best illustrated by the figures – 927 applications for individual tax rulings and 77 opinions issued from the Head of the National Revenue Administration. This does not, however, mean that family foundations are being used on a massive scale for aggressive tax optimisation. A significant proportion of the queries concerned simply how to correctly apply the complex regulations.

NIS2 and the National Cybersecurity System Act in transport: what you need to do before October 2026

The amended Act on the National Cybersecurity System (UKSC) has been in force since 3 April 2026. For transport sector undertakings, this means a specific compliance timeline, including an obligation to register with the National Cybersecurity System (KSC) registry by 3 October 2026. Failure to do so may result in substantial financial penalties, coupled with the risk of personal liability for senior management. Not every undertaking, however, automatically falls within the scope of the new regime. Read on to find out whether your organisation is affected and what you need to do before the deadline for preparation.

Family foundations: the government has done the maths and presented the bill

Three years. That’s how long we’ve been waiting for what the Council of Ministers had seen in the data from the outset – and has now disclosed in its review of the Family Foundation Act. The document not only diagnoses the problems, but also previews substantial changes to rules that founders and their advisers treated as settled and stable. And therein lies a problem that goes far beyond tax matters. If the rules of the game are changed while the game is being played, there can be neither planning stability nor trust in the law. It is no coincidence that one of the greatest concerns among entrepreneurs considering setting up a foundation is not the level of taxation, but the stability of the legal framework – which today is once again being called into question.

What the new swiss franc act means for banks

We now have a new Act on Special Measures for the Adjudication of Cases Concerning Loan Agreements Denominated in or Indexed to the Swiss Franc. The provisions come into force 14 days after publication. So now is a good time to look at what lies ahead and what banks should be doing today.

New draft Pay Transparency Act – what has changed since December 2025?

A second version of the draft act on strengthening the application of the right to equal pay for equal work or work of equal value between men and women has now been published. It refines procedures and deadlines and introduces a new supervisory body. We have already discussed the changes affecting the recruitment stage and the three pillars of the forthcoming pay transparency framework, noting that Poland will miss the EU transposition deadline of 7 June 2026. Now, we take a closer look at the further changes, new developments and risks that have emerged in the latest, April version of the draft.

Payment Services Regulation (PSR) – between consumer protection and due diligence

The draft Payment Services Regulation (PSR) is one of the most significant elements of the reform of the EU legal framework for payment services. Its principal aim is to enhance the security of cashless transactions and to reduce the scale of financial fraud, in particular that arising from the growth of digital channels. At the same time, the new rules are intended to introduce a liability model that will not result in risk being transferred entirely to financial institutions, whilst retaining an important role for independent due diligence on the part of the user.

Energy deregulation – key changes for businesses and energy consumers

The President has now signed the Energy Deregulation Act (UDER92). The new provisions cover both the relationships between energy undertakings and consumers, and matters relating to investment, district heating, and the administrative obligations of energy market participants. The Act introduces changes in the areas of billing, communication with consumers, grid connection, and the operations of undertakings in the energy and district heating sectors. We set out the key points to note.

Banking sector overview | Banking today and tomorrow | July 2026

Under the draft legislation, banks will be required to offer existing borrowers a switch from WIBOR-based to POLSTR-based interest rates, a mechanism intended to speed up the voluntary transition of financial instruments to the new benchmark. The banking sector has responded positively to the proposal, according to Tadeusz Białek, President of the Polish Bank Association.

Contact us:

Natalia Kotłowska-Wochna

Natalia Kotłowska-Wochna

Attorney-at-Law / Partner/ New Tech, IP, Trade & Logistics Practice Group / Head of New Tech M&A

+48 606 689 185

n.kotlowska@kochanski.pl