Winning an interesting single assignment case before the SO in Warsaw

We are pleased to announce a favorable non-final judgment that JNS LEGAL obtained for its factoring client before the District Court in Warsaw. The judgment concerned the adjudication of a claim from a purchased receivable under a single assignment from a factoring debtor.

In the course of the trial, the defendant undertook various defense tactics - from challenging the plaintiff's standing or the authority of the person making the statements of intent on behalf of the defendant, to questioning the effectiveness of the assignment of claims and the notice of assignment, to questioning the receipt of the goods covered by the invoice, to a "precautionary" statement of set-off.

However, the court agreed with the arguments of JNS LEGAL's lawyers, pointing out in oral reasons for the decision that:

• [assignment notice thread] - An email with a scan of the notice of assignment which a board member (not registered in the KRS) "forwarded" to the further registered CEO - constitutes an effective notice of assignment, and the notice itself can be proven by any means, including such DW/FWD type correspondence;
• [no objection]. - The failure of a member of the debtor's board of directors to respond to the documents received, including the invoice, GM, notice of assignment, places the burden on the debtor and constitutes tacit acceptance of this state of affairs;
• [post footer] - a board member's use of a position footer in e-mail correspondence to third parties constitutes a presumption of holding that position;
• [ineffectiveness of deduction]. - In accordance with Article 91 of the CCP, a power of attorney by law does not include the authority to make a substantive declaration of deduction, thus the failure to disclose the authority for such a deduction renders it ineffective at such a level that it is not subject to further examination;
• [the actions of an unauthorized person]. - knowingly signing a VAT invoice by an unauthorized person on the part of the debtor to extort a benefit (factoring advance) from that invoice - even for a third party - triggers the Court's consideration of an ex officio notice of suspicion.

The verdict of the District Court in Warsaw, not final.