Mazowieckie

Kujawsko-Pomorskie

Świętokrzyskie

Opolskie

Lubelskie

Warmińsko-Mazurskie

Podkarpackie

Lubuskie

Wielkopolskie

Podlaskie

Łódzkie

Zachodniopomorskie

Pomorskie

Małopolskie

Dolnośląskie

Śląskie

Poland

3.20% minimum share of biofuels in petrol and for diesel fuel 3.22% in the first quarter, 5.53% in the second and third quarter and 3.68% in the fourth quarter

Increasing the share of biofuels in the market of transport fuels to 10% by 2020, and increasing the use of second generation biofuels

Increasing the use of renewable energy sources in the final energy use to at least 15% in 2020 and further increase in the following years

Reducing the energy intensity of Polish economy to the EU-15 level

To increase by 23 per cent in energy efficiency by 2030.



To increase by 21-33 per cent the share of RES in gross final energy consumption in 2030.



To increase by14 per cent the share of renewable energy in transport in 2030.



A reduction of 7 per cent of&nbsp; CO2 emissions in non-ETS compared to 2005.



increase the number of e-vehicles in Poland to 1 million by 2025

6% cut in CO2e emissions by 2012 against a 1998 baseline

63 aggregated energy efficiency ratio by 2020 against a 2000 baseline

30% obliged entity's energy efficiency requirements implemented by 2016, then 20% by 2017, then 10% by 2018

356.5 hm3 reduction in---water consumption (to 10100 hm3) by 2020 against a 2010 baseline

35% biodegradable municipal waste in landfills by 2020 against a 1995 baseline

15% final energy consumption from renewables by 2020

15% renewable energy of final energy by 2020

35% cut in GHG emissions from biofuels and bioliquids compared to fossil fuels by 2017, then 50% by 2018 against a 2008 baseline

The Climate Litigation Database

Find climate change litigation data and indicators for {text}.

{text} litigation

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law provides Climate Litigation Database, a comprehensive database of US and Global climate change caselaw

Quickly and easily search through the complete text of thousands of climate change law and policy documents from every country.

Search the Climate Litigation Database

In December 2023, Polish state-controlled energy company Enea filed a civil lawsuit against former board members and its directors and officers (D&O) liability insurers, seeking over PLN 656 million in damages over the failed Ostrołęka C coal-fired power plant project. The suit alleges that former board and supervisory board members breached their fiduciary duties by approving the high-risk coal investment in 2018, despite financial and climate-related warnings.

Enea’s decision to pursue the claim followed a 2021 audit by Poland’s Supreme Audit Office, which found failures in the company’s risk management and recommended accountability for the project’s losses. Shareholders formally approved the lawsuit in January 2024 with 87% support at an extraordinary general meeting.

The project had faced early opposition from minority shareholder ClientEarth, which initiated legal action in 2018 alleging the investment breached directors’ duties of due diligence. A 2019 court decision ruled the AGM resolution approving the plant invalid. The plant was eventually abandoned mid-construction in 2020, and Enea wrote off nearly PLN 1 billion.

The current lawsuit seeks to establish civil liability of both the individuals responsible for the decision and the insurers who provided cover under D&O policies. Legal commentators note that the case indirectly addresses directors’ duties in the context of climate-related financial risks, such as rising carbon prices, EU energy reforms, financing constraints, and competition from renewables.

This is one of the first climate-related damages actions against corporate board members in Poland and may have significant implications for corporate governance, fiduciary duty, and insurer liability in the context of the low-carbon transition.

In August 2023, under the Law and Justice (PiS) government, Poland filed four annulment actions at the EU Court of Justice challenging elements of the EU’s Fit for 55 climate package, including the phase-out of combustion engine vehicles and related energy measures. Poland argued these measures exceeded EU competences, breached the principle of subsidiarity, and imposed disproportionate burdens on energy-intensive industries.

Following the October 2023 election of the Civic Coalition, led by Prime Minister Donald Tusk, Poland reversed its position on EU climate policy and formally withdrew the lawsuits in February 2024.

Despite this change in government policy, Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal issued a judgment on 10 June 2025 in case K 10/24. The Tribunal ruled—by majority—that the interpretation of Article 192(1) in conjunction with Article 192(2)(c) TFEU, as developed by the CJEU, was incompatible with Articles 2, 4(1), 7, 8(1) and 90(1) of the Polish Constitution. In particular, the Court found that narrowing the unanimity requirement in the Council to only those EU environmental measures whose primary intended effect is to significantly influence a Member State’s energy mix undermines Polish sovereignty and circumvents the constitutional procedure for transferring competences.

The Tribunal discontinued review of other claims—concerning alleged disproportionate obligations under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and impacts on economic freedom—on procedural grounds. It stressed that the ruling does not invalidate the relevant TFEU provisions themselves, but declares unconstitutional the manner in which they have been interpreted and applied, with potential implications for Poland’s future compliance with EU climate and energy legislation.

ClientEarth, on behalf of a private citizen, brought an action against the Polish government alleging human rights violations for their failure to protect the citizen from the worsening effects of climate change. The case names the State Treasury as the defendant, represented by Minister for Climate and Environment, Minister for State Assets, Minister for Development, Labour and Technology, Minister for Infrastructure, Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development, and the Minister for Funds and Regional Policy. The plaintiff asks the court to determine the defendant's liability resulting from the public authorities’ allowing the emission of greenhouse gases (GHG) from the territory of Poland in excess of the ‘fair share.’ The plaintiff alleges this resulted in violations of the right to enjoy the value of the natural environment, including the right to live in stable and safe climatic conditions, health, respect for the place of residence, the right to privacy and respect for family life.

The claim was brought by ClientEarth pursuant to Article 61 § 1(2) of the Polish Code of Civil Procedure on behalf of M. G., who they claim was wronged by the actions of public authorities resulting in the infringement or threat to her personal rights. The alleged conduct of the State authorities, for which the State Treasury bears responsibility, consists of a series of acts and omissions which have the effect of allowing excessive GHG emissions from the territory of the State, contributing to the deepening of the global warming effect leading to irreversible and dangerous climate change which directly affects the plaintiff. The plaintiff claims she is already suffering from the effects of climate change, which have a clear impact on her life at her place of residence. These include, in particular, heavy rainfall, prolonged droughts and extreme weather phenomena such as thunderstorms, fires and gusty winds, which spread fire and cause sandstorms, all of which are damaging to human health. The plaintiff claims these events are unprecedented in relation to previous decades, when similar phenomena were characterised by much lower frequency, scale, and intensity. 

Poland is among the largest emitters within the European Union, ranking among the top three member states in terms of total CO2 emissions, emissions per capita and emissions in relation to GDP. In terms of climate policy, Poland also ranks among the lowest in international climate rankings, and its progress in reducing GHG emissions is assessed as incompatible with the Paris Agreement. Regardless of the results of the completed strategy, the fulfilment of the climate commitments of the European Union adopted for 2030 is considered to be at risk. 

The plaintiff alleges that the actions of public authorities leading to excessive GHG emissions are unlawful, which is the premise of Article 24 of the Polish Civil Code. Further, they result in a threat to fundamental human rights, guaranteed inter alia by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Member States are obliged to respect these rights not only by refraining from violating them, but also by taking measures to ensure that they are respected (so-called positive state obligations). However, adverse climate change caused by high emissions significantly interferes with individuals' ability to exercise such fundamental rights as the right to life (Article 2 ECHR) and the right to respect for private and family life and home (Article 8 ECHR). The plaintiff alleges that actively contributing to the exacerbation of the dangerous phenomenon of global warming is also in breach of numerous constitutional norms, including the obligation to prevent the negative effects of environmental degradation on health (Article 68(4) in conjunction with Article 68(1) of the Polish Constitution) and to protect the environment and ensure ecological safety for contemporary and future generations (Article 74(1) and (2) of the Polish Constitution). This action is also contrary to the principles of social co-existence, including the rule prohibiting causing harm to another.

The plaintiff seeks remedies based on a ‘fair share’ analysis for Poland. The analysis presented by the plaintiff found that in order to make an equitable contribution to meeting the 1.5oC goal of the Paris Agreement, the Polish State must: (i) reduce national GHG emissions by 61% by 2030 (below 1990 levels); (ii) reach net zero emissions by 2043; and (iii) not exceed between 2020 and 2043 the carbon budget attributable to Poland of 4.1 Gt CO2eq.

On June 11, 2021, the District Court in Łomża found itself not competent to hear the case and transferred the case to the District Court in Warsaw for examination. ClientEarth appealed, and on September 8, 2021, the Court of Appeal in Białystok reversed the decision of the District Court in Łomża. Thus, the case has been returned to the Regional Court in Łomża for examination.

ClientEarth, on behalf of a private citizen, brought an action against the Polish government alleging human rights violations for their failure to protect the citizen from the worsening effects of climate change. The case names the State Treasury as the defendant, represented by Minister for Climate and Environment, Minister for State Assets, Minister for Development, Labour and Technology, Minister for Infrastructure, Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development, and the Minister for Funds and Regional Policy. The plaintiff asks the court to determine the defendant's liability resulting from the public authorities’ allowing the emission of greenhouse gases (GHG) from the territory of Poland in excess of the ‘fair share.’ The plaintiff alleges this resulted in violations of the right to enjoy the value of the natural environment, including the right to live in stable and safe climatic conditions, health, respect for the place of residence, the right to privacy and respect for family life.

The claim was brought by ClientEarth pursuant to Article 61 § 1(2) of the Polish Code of Civil Procedure on behalf of M. S., who they claim was wronged by the actions of public authorities resulting in the infringement or threat to her personal rights. The alleged conduct of the State authorities, for which the State Treasury bears responsibility, consists of a series of acts and omissions which have the effect of allowing excessive GHG emissions from the territory of the State, contributing to the deepening of the global warming effect leading to irreversible and dangerous climate change which directly affects the plaintiff. The plaintiff claims she is already suffering from the effects of climate change, which have a clear impact on her life at her place of residence. These include, in particular, heavy rainfall, prolonged droughts and extreme weather phenomena such as thunderstorms, fires and gusty winds, which spread fire and cause sandstorms, all of which are damaging to human health. The plaintiff claims these events are unprecedented in relation to previous decades, when similar phenomena were characterised by much lower frequency, scale, and intensity. 

Poland is among the largest emitters within the European Union, ranking among the top three member states in terms of total CO2 emissions, emissions per capita and emissions in relation to GDP. In terms of climate policy, Poland also ranks among the lowest in international climate rankings, and its progress in reducing GHG emissions is assessed as incompatible with the Paris Agreement. Regardless of the results of the completed strategy, the fulfilment of the climate commitments of the European Union adopted for 2030 is considered to be at risk. 

The plaintiff alleges that the actions of public authorities leading to excessive GHG emissions are unlawful, which is the premise of Article 24 of the Polish Civil Code. Further, they result in a threat to fundamental human rights, guaranteed inter alia by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Member States are obliged to respect these rights not only by refraining from violating them, but also by taking measures to ensure that they are respected (so-called positive state obligations). However, adverse climate change caused by high emissions significantly interferes with individuals' ability to exercise such fundamental rights as the right to life (Article 2 ECHR) and the right to respect for private and family life and home (Article 8 ECHR). The plaintiff alleges that actively contributing to the exacerbation of the dangerous phenomenon of global warming is also in breach of numerous constitutional norms, including the obligation to prevent the negative effects of environmental degradation on health (Article 68(4) in conjunction with Article 68(1) of the Polish Constitution) and to protect the environment and ensure ecological safety for contemporary and future generations (Article 74(1) and (2) of the Polish Constitution). This action is also contrary to the principles of social co-existence, including the rule prohibiting causing harm to another.

The plaintiff seeks remedies based on a ‘fair share’ analysis for Poland. The analysis presented by the plaintiff found that in order to make an equitable contribution to meeting the 1.5oC goal of the Paris Agreement, the Polish State must: (i) reduce national GHG emissions by 61% by 2030 (below 1990 levels); (ii) reach net zero emissions by 2043; and (iii) not exceed between 2020 and 2043 the carbon budget attributable to Poland of 4.1 Gt CO2eq.

Geography

Poland

Recent cases