Vehicle Confiscation for DUI in Poland: 2025 Regulations

Vehicle Confiscation for DUI in Poland: 2025 Regulations

Vehicle confiscation for DUI in Poland means a court-ordered forfeiture of a vehicle (or an equivalent monetary amount) linked to driving under the influence. It is a criminal-law measure applied in specific cases defined by statute, separate from administrative driving bans and separate from a standard criminal fine. The purpose is to remove the economic benefit and deter repeat high-risk behavior, while increasing the immediate financial impact of a DUI case on the offender and, indirectly, on business continuity for employers and fleet users.

Legal basis: forfeiture rules and DUI offences

The key legal framework is set by the Polish Criminal Code (Kodeks karny) provisions on forfeiture and by the provisions criminalising drunk driving. In practice, courts apply forfeiture rules when the statutory thresholds are met, and the decision is taken within the criminal judgment (or in a relevant penal order), not by the police at the roadside.

• DUI offence (standard case): driving a motor vehicle in land traffic while intoxicated (state of intoxication) – Article 178a § 1 of the Criminal Code [1].

• Repeat DUI: recidivist circumstances under Article 178a § 4 of the Criminal Code [1].

• Forfeiture (including vehicle-related forfeiture): Article 44b of the Criminal Code (introduced to enable forfeiture of a vehicle or its equivalent in certain DUI scenarios) [1].

For business decision-makers and foreign drivers, the practical point is that forfeiture is not automatically “police seizure forever.” It is a measure decided by the court, but the vehicle may be temporarily secured early as evidence or to ensure future enforcement, depending on the case circumstances and procedural decisions.

When can a vehicle be confiscated for DUI in Poland in 2025?

In 2025, vehicle confiscation continues to apply where statutory conditions are met, typically where:

• the offender drove a motor vehicle in a state of intoxication (stan nietrzeźwości) and statutory conditions for forfeiture under Article 44b of the Criminal Code are met (in practice: especially high blood alcohol concentration or repeat DUI), or

• there is a repeat DUI scenario qualifying under Article 178a § 4 of the Criminal Code, or

• another situation specified directly in Article 44b applies.

Courts assess the legal thresholds based on toxicology evidence (breathalyzer protocol, blood test results, chain of custody, calibration records) and the qualification of the act (misdemeanor vs crime).

Korekta merytoryczna: in Polish law, driving in a state after use of alcohol (stan po użyciu alkoholu) is typically handled as a misdemeanor under the Code of Petty Offences (Kodeks wykroczeń), while Article 178a § 1 concerns driving in a state of intoxication (criminal offence).

Three statutory exceptions: when forfeiture is not applied as “taking the car”

Vehicle-related forfeiture for DUI is not always executed as confiscation of the physical vehicle. The Criminal Code provides exceptions that change the form of forfeiture. The three core exceptions are as follows:

1. Co-owned vehicle: if the vehicle is not exclusively owned by the offender (for example, joint ownership with a spouse or another person), the court does not forfeit the entire vehicle from all owners. Instead, the court orders forfeiture of the equivalent value (przepadek równowartości) under the statutory mechanism set out in Article 44b of the Criminal Code, taking into account the legal ownership situation [1].

2. Leased or rented vehicle: if the offender was driving a vehicle that does not belong to the offender because it is leased, rented, or otherwise provided by a third party (including many company fleets), the court applies forfeiture of the equivalent value rather than forfeiting the vehicle from its owner [1].

3. Car sold or unavailable: if forfeiture of the vehicle is impossible because the vehicle has been sold, destroyed, lost, or cannot be seized for other reasons, the court orders forfeiture of the equivalent value [1].

These exceptions are operationally important for companies. Even if a fleet vehicle cannot be forfeited from the leasing company, the employee-driver may still face a substantial monetary equivalent. That can create employment, HR, and compliance consequences, including reimbursement disputes, internal investigations, and reputational exposure if the incident becomes public.

How “equivalent value” is calculated and why it matters

Where forfeiture is executed as an equivalent value, the court determines the amount using the vehicle’s value, typically based on market value considerations and evidence in the file. This is not the same as a standard fine. A fine is a penal sanction assessed under separate rules (and may be calculated in day-fines), while forfeiture is a property measure aimed at depriving the offender of the economic value tied to the offence [1].

From a business perspective, equivalent-value forfeiture can exceed what many drivers expect. It can also influence settlement posture, willingness to accept penal orders, and the overall financial exposure of an employee or executive under investigation.

Relationship with other consequences: driving ban, criminal record, and corporate risk

Vehicle confiscation does not replace other standard DUI consequences. A DUI offence under the Criminal Code normally involves:

• Driving ban (zakaz prowadzenia pojazdów) – often a key operational impact for employers relying on mobility.

• Monetary payment (świadczenie pieniężne) to the Fund for Victim Assistance and Post-Penitentiary Assistance (Fundusz Pomocy Pokrzywdzonym oraz Pomocy Postpenitencjarnej) in cases provided by the Criminal Code.

• Criminal record implications affecting visas, permits, security clearances, and management roles.

For organisations, the case can trigger internal obligations: incident reporting, safety reviews, fleet policy updates, and potential controls where alcohol-related misconduct intersects with expense fraud, misuse of assets, or public procurement rules.

Procedural timeline: what typically happens after a DUI stop

Although each case depends on facts, a typical sequence is:

1. Roadside stop and testing (breath test, possibly repeated measurements).

2. Further evidence – blood test where required or disputed; documentation of impairment indicators.

3. Criminal proceedings – charges under Article 178a, collection of evidence, and assessment of forfeiture prerequisites.

4. Decision on forfeiture – in the final court decision, either forfeiture of the vehicle or forfeiture of the equivalent value (including where one of the three exceptions applies) [1].

For foreign nationals, early procedural steps matter: ensuring proper interpretation, verifying test legality, checking whether the correct qualification (petty offence vs crime) was applied, and assessing whether the file supports the statutory prerequisites connected to forfeiture.

Key compliance points for companies using fleets in Poland

• Fleet policy clarity: define alcohol rules, reporting obligations, and consequences, including for leased vehicles where “equivalent value” forfeiture can still hit the driver.

• Driver onboarding and training: document training and acknowledgements to reduce organisational exposure.

• Crisis protocol: set an internal process for immediate response, document preservation, and communications if the incident escalates publicly.

• Employment law follow-up: align disciplinary steps with evidence and avoid premature conclusions before results and procedural status are confirmed.

These measures reduce downtime and help management demonstrate due diligence if an incident leads to regulatory scrutiny or litigation.

If a DUI case in Poland raises questions about vehicle confiscation, it may be necessary to consult the file early and assess whether forfeiture prerequisites are actually met and whether any of the statutory exceptions apply. Kopeć & Zaborowski (KKZ) supports clients in criminal cases, including evidence review and crisis coordination. To discuss possible steps with a lawyer, use: https://criminallawpoland.com/contact/.

FAQ: vehicle confiscation for DUI in Poland

1) Is vehicle confiscation automatic for every DUI in Poland?

No. It is applied under the Criminal Code rules only when statutory conditions are met and is ordered by the court in the criminal decision, not automatically at the roadside [1].

2) Can the court take a leased company car after a DUI?

Typically, the vehicle itself is not forfeited from the leasing company. Under the statutory rules for a vehicle not belonging exclusively to the offender (including leased/rented use), the court orders forfeiture of the equivalent value instead [1].

3) What if the car is co-owned with a spouse or business partner?

Under the statutory mechanism in Article 44b, the court does not forfeit the vehicle from the other owner. Instead, forfeiture is applied as an equivalent value measure, depending on the ownership and case facts [1].

4) What happens if the vehicle was sold before the case ended?

If forfeiture of the vehicle is impossible because it was sold or otherwise unavailable, the court orders forfeiture of the equivalent value under Article 44b [1].

5) Is forfeiture the same as a fine?

No. A fine is a penal sanction; forfeiture is a property measure. Both can be imposed in one case, depending on the legal qualification and circumstances [1].

6) Can a foreign driver challenge vehicle forfeiture in Poland?

A challenge depends on the facts and evidence. Common areas include the legality and reliability of alcohol testing, correct legal qualification (petty offence vs crime), and whether statutory prerequisites for forfeiture were met, including whether the case requires an equivalent value rather than the car itself [1].

Bibliography

1. Act of 6 June 1997 – Criminal Code (Kodeks karny), in particular Article 178a and Article 44b (consolidated text as published in the Journal of Laws of the Republic of Poland – Dz.U.).

2. Act of 20 May 1971 – Code of Petty Offences (Kodeks wykroczeń), in particular provisions on driving after use of alcohol (stan po użyciu alkoholu) (consolidated text as published in Dz.U.).

This is informational material, not legal advice. The assessment of confiscation/forfeiture exposure depends on the specific facts, evidence, and procedural status.

Weryfikowalne twierdzenia (checklista fact-check)

• Definicja środka: „court-ordered forfeiture of a vehicle (or an equivalent monetary amount)” – weryfikowalne w przepisach o przepadku w Kodeksie karnym (art. 44b KK).

• Organ decyzyjny: przepadek orzeka sąd w orzeczeniu kończącym sprawę, a nie policja na miejscu – weryfikowalne w KPK/KK (orzeczenie przepadku jako środek karny/środek związany z odpowiedzialnością karną).

• Podstawa czynu: art. 178a § 1 KK jako typ podstawowy prowadzenia w stanie nietrzeźwości – weryfikowalne w KK.

• Recydywa/typ kwalifikowany: art. 178a § 4 KK – weryfikowalne w KK.

• Podstawa przepadku pojazdu/równowartości: art. 44b KK – weryfikowalne w KK.

• Rozróżnienie „misdemeanor vs crime”: „stan po użyciu alkoholu” jako wykroczenie (Kodeks wykroczeń), „stan nietrzeźwości” jako przestępstwo z art. 178a § 1 KK – weryfikowalne w KW i KK.

• Wyjątki skutkujące równowartością: współwłasność / pojazd niebędący wyłączną własnością sprawcy (np. leasing/najem) / niemożność zajęcia – weryfikowalne w art. 44b KK.

• Sposób ustalania wartości: „market value considerations and evidence in the file” – do weryfikacji w praktyce orzeczniczej i przepisach o dowodach; w samym tekście KK co do zasady przesądza o „przepadku równowartości”, ale sposób wyceny wynika z postępowania dowodowego.

• Inne konsekwencje: zakaz prowadzenia pojazdów, świadczenie pieniężne na Fundusz Pomocy Pokrzywdzonym oraz Pomocy Postpenitencjarnej, wpis w KRK – weryfikowalne w KK oraz ustawie o KRK (co do skutku skazania).

• Procedura: badanie trzeźwości, ewentualnie krew, postępowanie karne, rozstrzygnięcie o przepadku w wyroku – weryfikowalne w KPK oraz przepisach wykonawczych dot. badań.