The District Prosecutor’s Office in Legnica has submitted an indictment to the local District Court against former court enforcement officer Agnieszka W. for allegedly “while serving as a court enforcement officer at the District Court in Lubin, acting to the detriment of the public interest and the private interests of 255 parties to enforcement and security proceedings, failing to fulfil her obligations under the Act on Court Enforcement Officers, including the timely transfer of recovered amounts and unused advance payments to participants in the proceedings and covering the costs of enforcement activities exclusively from commission-based remuneration and court enforcement fees other than enforcement fees, as a result of which she spent funds accumulated in the office’s accounts contrary to their intended purpose.”
Investigators found that W. used funds that should have been transferred to entitled persons for the ongoing operation of the court enforcement office she ran, as well as for her own needs, thereby misappropriating entrusted money totalling PLN 288,364.25, which constitutes property of considerable value.
On 29 September 2020, an inspection of Agnieszka W.’s office was conducted at the request of the Council of the Chamber of Court Enforcement Officers in Wrocław. – The inspection revealed shortages and improper management of bank accounts intended to service enforcement proceedings, delays in transferring recovered funds to creditors, and incorrect calculation of fees – explains Liliana Łukasiewicz of the District Prosecutor’s Office in Legnica.
The result? By an order issued in October 2020, the President of the District Court in Lubin—having established an obvious and serious breach of legal provisions—removed the aforementioned court enforcement officer from her duties.
Also at the order of the president of the court in Lubin, a court expert in office administration and financial operations in court enforcement offices conducted an ad hoc financial inspection of the office. The post-inspection report indicated that the office’s current accounts were used to meet other obligations unrelated to the enforcement proceedings, including paying invoices, wages and fees under contracts for specific tasks, as well as private loan obligations, including car instalments.
Prosecutor L. Łukasiewicz:
In a ruling dated 16 March 2021, the Disciplinary Commission at the National Council of Court Enforcement Officers in Warsaw found the aforementioned court enforcement officer guilty of a gross and persistent violation of legal provisions, as well as undermining the authority and dignity of the office held and violating the Code of Professional Ethics of a Court Enforcement Officer. It ordered her dismissal from the court enforcement service.
During the prosecutorial investigation, the office’s bank documentation was obtained and its accounting data secured. An expert opinion was subsequently obtained from a specialist in office administration and financial operations in court enforcement offices.
Spokesperson:
According to the opinion, Agnieszka W. used the current accounts to meet obligations other than those related to returning and transferring funds to creditors. The expert also found delays in recording collected amounts and in transferring recovered funds to creditors. Uncompleted transfers, postal orders and unused advance payments made by creditors were also discovered. The opinion listed amounts which, despite being accounted for, never reached the creditors. The opinion obtained showed that as of 8 October 2020—that is, the date on which Agnieszka W. handed the office over to her appointed substitute—the shortfall at the office amounted to PLN 288,364.25.
Questioned as a suspect, Agnieszka W. did not plead guilty and refused to provide explanations. The offence charged carries a sentence of 1 to 10 years in prison.
Liliana Łukasiewicz: – Since as many as 255 injured parties—both legal entities and individuals—were identified in the case, the prosecutor, believing that notifying each of them individually of their rights would seriously hinder the conduct of the proceedings, used the option of notifying them of the submission of the indictment via the website of the District Prosecutor’s Office in Legnica, where announcements from all prosecutor’s offices in the Legnica district are published. Article 131 § 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure also allows parties to be informed of the conclusion of proceedings through the press, radio and television.
No application for voluntary submission to punishment was filed, which means that the case will be heard by the District Court in Legnica under the ordinary procedure.
What does this mean for the injured parties?
At this stage of the proceedings, following the submission of the indictment, the most important information for the injured parties is that until the beginning of the court proceedings at the main hearing—that is, until the indictment is read out, usually at the first hearing scheduled in the case—they may submit a statement that they wish to act as an auxiliary prosecutor. After the proceedings before the court conclude, this will give them the possibility of potentially appealing the decision issued, namely the judgment.
Furthermore, under Article 49a of the Code of Criminal Procedure, an injured party may, until the court proceedings are closed at the main hearing—that is, throughout the entire trial—submit a request under Article 46 § 1 of the Criminal Code for compensation for the damage in full or in part.
The prosecutor may, and usually does, submit such a request as well. Nevertheless, injured parties also have this right, and the aforementioned persons are informed of it in this notice.