A summary judgment was issued on August 28, 2026, by the District Court in Bolesławiec. It concerns the president of the Artistic Handicraft Cooperative “Ceramika Artystyczna,” who was charged in connection with a conflict involving the cooperative’s longtime distributor, Piotr Brzeski.

The court issued the ruling at a session, without the participation of the parties and without conducting a full evidentiary proceeding at a trial. In the summary judgment, it found the president guilty of disclosing and using information constituting trade secrets, as well as disseminating false and misleading information about an entrepreneur.

For the first offense, the court imposed a fine of 200 daily rates of PLN 25 each, totaling PLN 5,000. For the offense involving the dissemination of false information, it imposed an additional PLN 2,000 fine. The court also awarded court costs of PLN 1,494.26 and a fee of PLN 700.

The ruling is not final, however, and does not determine the president’s liability.

The defense filed an objection

The president’s defense counsel challenged the summary judgment in its entirety. The objection was submitted to the District Court in Bolesławiec on September 2.

Under the law, filing an objection causes the summary judgment to lose its force. The case will now be heard under the ordinary rules. This means that a trial will be held during which the parties may present their positions, submit evidentiary motions, and question witnesses. The court will not be bound by the content of the summary judgment.

The president of Ceramika Artystyczna therefore remains an accused person, but benefits from the presumption of innocence. Only proceedings conducted under the ordinary procedure may end in a final acquittal or conviction.

The cooperative’s management representative, attorney Arkadiusz Malak, told the editorial office that the accused does not admit guilt and intends to prove her innocence in court. The defense also believes that the preparatory proceedings did not fully clarify the matter and that some of the evidentiary motions submitted by the defense were denied.

Trade secrets and contractors from the USA

The charges concern the period from June to November 2024. According to the prosecution, the president allegedly provided Piotr Brzeski’s American contractors with information about his settlements, orders, production, inventory levels, and payments made.

The correspondence allegedly included, among other things, demands for payment, transfer confirmations, the amounts owed, and detailed data concerning the number and value of the products ordered.

Investigators claim that these actions were intended to remove the existing distributor and lead his American customers to establish direct cooperation with the Bolesławiec cooperative. The prosecution also accuses the president of disseminating false information about the entrepreneur and his financial situation.

We reported in July 2026 that an indictment had been filed with the court. The conflict with Piotr Brzeski was also one of the proceedings previously described in an article about Ceramika Artystyczna’s legal disputes.

Complaint against attorney Arkadiusz Malak

A related aspect of the conflict was Piotr Brzeski’s complaint against attorney Arkadiusz Malak. It concerned a letter prepared by the lawyer on behalf of the cooperative’s authorities, an unsigned draft of which was subsequently posted on the noticeboard at Ceramika Artystyczna.

The National Bar Council found the complaint obviously unfounded and took no further action on it. Separate private-prosecution proceedings for defamation were discontinued by the District Court in Bolesławiec on the grounds of attorney-client immunity. The court indicated that a lawyer’s actions taken in the course of practicing the profession may be subject to disciplinary liability, but in this situation could not be the subject of private criminal proceedings. This court order is not final.

The most important proceedings currently remain the case against the president of Ceramika Artystyczna. Following the objection to the summary judgment, the court will have to hear the case from the beginning and conduct the evidentiary proceedings at a trial.