Criminal law is present in virtually all the areas of business transactions, it concerns both real market and financial market transactions. The specificity of economic and fiscal offences requires that the lawyers have vast knowledge of criminal law as well as of standards governing business transactions and regulating the functioning of the participants of such trade, in particular tax law, civil law, company law and public procurement law.
In order to provide our clients with the best possible protection in criminal business cases and criminal fiscal cases, we have created a team of lawyers who have vast experience in court proceedings and interdisciplinary knowledge.
Scope of assistance
corruption crimes, with particular emphasis on venality and bribery, including manager venality and manager bribery, as well as influence peddling,
carousel fraud, with particular emphasis on crimes related to steel, fuel, food, electronic products and energy trading,
mismanagement in organisations and also in groups of companies,
economic fraud and common fraud,
crimes against documents, with particular emphasis on intellectual forgery and material forgery,
crimes on capital markets, with particular emphasis on disclosure or use of confidential information, as well as manipulating financial instruments,
offences against creditors,
offences against information protection,
transgression of powers or breach of duty by officials,
disruption of public tender procedures,
offences related to medical errors,
Members of corporate bodies of commercial companies (management boards, supervisory boards)
High and medium level managers
Shareholders in commercial companies and partnerships
Entrepreneurs running a sole proprietorship
Public officials and persons holding public functions
Mr. X was the CEO in company Y. He made a contract with a consulting firm Z, under which that firm started providing its assistance involving preparation of company Y to participation in a major investment project. The consulting firms' fee was established in the form of a commission and it was payable on condition that Y qualifies for the project and performs it. Based on the assumed form of remuneration, its value was high. The prosecutor accused Mr. X of mismanagement and attestation of untruth in documents. According to the prosecuting body the consulting firm did not have the possibility to perform the contract, and the invoice was issued to draw money out of company Y. In the course of the proceedings the lawyers from our law firm proved that the services of the consulting firm were actually rendered and they had a market value. Our lawyers also managed to challenge the reliability of the key witness of the prosecution. As a result, the Court did not agree to the grounds of the charges and Mr. X was found not guilty in a final and binding court decision.
Mr. X was the CEO in company Y. The company was running a business involving heaving industry equipment trading. Due to the scale of operations, company Y used external financing in the form of a number of bank loans. After economic changes on the market the company had serious financial problems which resulted in filing a bankruptcy petition and failure to repay the loans in the total amount exceeding PLN 20,000,000. The CEO of company Y was accused of fraud related to the loans taken by the company. In the course of court proceedings our lawyers showed that the company's insolvency was due to objective circumstances and the accused himself did not have any intention of committing a crime at the moment of taking the loans. After many years of the proceedings the Court found Mr. X not guilty of the charges in a final and binding decisions.
Mr. X was the CEO in company Y. Company Y took a loan the repayment of which was secured by the company's real property in the form of mortgage at the value of the property. Due to a difficult situation of company Y, the company stopped repaying the loan and other of its liabilities. Under an agreement with the bank, in order to settle the loan, the company transferred the real property which was subject to mortgage to the bank. The prosecutor accused Mr. X of committing a crime against the other creditors, claiming that as a result of transferring the real property to the bank, they were deprived of the possibility of satisfying their claims from the company's assets. In the course of the proceedings our lawyers proved that the other creditors were not deprived of the possibility of satisfying their claims and that it was not the intention of the accused to do that. The court found him innocent in a binding and final decision, indicating that transfer of real property encumbered with mortgage did not have any impact upon the possibility of satisfying the claims of the other creditors of company Y.
Mr. X was a contractor of company Z where Mr. Y worked as the sales director. Mr. Y purchased goods for company Z under market conditions in the form of the so called proprietary tender procedures. In one of the tenders Mr. X offered the best product and offered the best conditions of sale, therefore company Z purchased goods from Mr. X. To express his gratitude, Mr. X gave Mr. Y a financial benefit in the form of a particular sum of money. The prosecutor accused Mr. Y of manager venality. In the course of the proceedings it was proven that the fact that Mr. Y accepted the financial benefit did not have any impact whatsoever upon selection of Mr. X's offer and therefore it did not cause any harm to company Z. The Court concurred on the presented line of defence and found Mr. Y not guilty of crimes as accused, in a final and binding decisions.
Attorney at Law, founder of the Chmielniak Adwokaci law firm