A stay of a PWZ resolution may protect a doctor while a court reviews the case. However, filing a complaint with the administrative court does not, by itself, allow the doctor to keep treating patients. The resolution, the legal ground for losing the licence and the court order all matter. Healthcare employers must check these points before arranging clinical work.
Law checked on 21 September 2026. PWZ means the Polish right to practise medicine. ORL is the regional medical council; NRL is the Supreme Medical Council. WSA is the voivodeship administrative court.
Stay of a PWZ resolution: filing is not enough
Article 61 § 1 of the Law on Proceedings before Administrative Courts states that a complaint does not suspend the challenged act. Therefore, proof of filing does not replace a valid licence. A court case number does not establish the doctor’s current right to practise either.
You can, however, seek interim protection. Before sending the complaint to the court, the relevant authority may suspend implementation under Article 61 § 2. After that transfer, WSA may examine the request. An authority’s refusal does not prevent an application to the court.
A timely administrative appeal may follow different rules. If the resolution is an administrative decision open to appeal, Article 130 of the Code of Administrative Procedure and its exceptions require review. Do not apply that rule automatically to every medical council resolution.
Which act should the application cover?
First, identify the decision that actually affects the licence. An ORL resolution about PWZ and an NRL ruling declaring an appeal inadmissible serve different purposes. The latter may simply close the appeal route. Suspending only that procedural ruling may therefore offer no practical protection.
Article 61 § 3 also permits protection against acts issued in proceedings within the same matter. Even so, the application must identify a specific act and explain the request. It should connect the resolution, the register entry and the removal from clinical duties.
A dispute involving ORL and NRL may require two complaints. See our explanation of two WSA complaints in a PWZ case. Interim protection should address the act that causes the alleged harm.
What does the court assess?
WSA may grant protection if there is a risk of significant damage or effects that would be difficult to reverse. Consequently, the application needs specific facts. A general statement about lost earnings may not suffice. Explain the scale of the risk, when it will arise and which documents support it.
For example, a threatened termination of employment, loss of the main source of income or interrupted training may matter. Each point must relate to the challenged act. Professional difficulty alone does not necessarily meet the statutory test.
Prepare the following documents for review:
- ORL and NRL rulings, together with proof of service;
- the PWZ document and current register information;
- the contract and the employer’s notice stopping clinical duties;
- evidence of lost income or a threat to professional training.
Also explain why a favourable judgment later would not repair all the consequences. This helps the court assess a concrete risk, separately from arguments about the resolution’s legality.
Statutory loss of a licence and a stay of a PWZ resolution
Cases concerning proof of Polish at B1 level need particular care. Article 30(4) of the Act of 15 May 2024 required a specified group of doctors to submit the language document by 1 May 2026. The provision attached loss of PWZ to failure to comply. It is therefore essential to establish whether the resolution removed the right or merely recorded a statutory consequence.
A stay does not create a new licence. If the right ceased directly under the statute, stopping a register-related act may not restore it. A favourable interim order alone cannot support a promise that the doctor may return to work. The legal basis and the individual documents remain decisive.
Checks before returning to clinical work
Read the operative part of the court order first. Next, establish which act it covers and whether a substantive legal basis for practice still exists. Check the register, the document’s validity and any limits on the scope, period or place of work.
In addition, rule out independent restrictions, such as a separate suspension of the licence. The healthcare provider should record its own checks. The doctor’s statement that litigation is underway does not settle the issue.
How long does interim protection last?
The court may amend or revoke its order if circumstances change. Under Article 61 § 6, the stay ceases when the court issues a judgment allowing the complaint, or when a judgment dismissing it becomes final. After a successful complaint, protection under Article 152 requires a separate assessment.
An interlocutory appeal to the Supreme Administrative Court is available against an order granting or refusing a stay. The usual time limit is seven days from service of the order. Therefore, a refusal calls for a prompt review of the reasons and the available remedy.
Frequently asked questions
Does applying for a stay allow immediate work?
No. The application itself does not suspend the resolution’s effects. Continuing clinical work requires a current legal basis, regardless of when the application was sent.
Can the request form part of the complaint?
Yes. It may also be filed separately. In either case, identify the correct act, consider the stage of proceedings and explain why interim protection is needed.
Does refusal mean the main case is lost?
No. Interim protection and review of the act’s legality are separate questions. Nevertheless, the doctor’s current licensing status must be respected while the case continues.
Legal support for doctors and healthcare employers
Our law firm reviews ORL and NRL rulings, prepares complaints and applications for interim protection, and handles interlocutory appeals. We also assess the legal basis for allowing a doctor to provide care. Learn more about our legal services for doctors and medical entities in Poland.
Arrange a paid review of your documents and tell us the nearest deadline. Contacting the firm does not suspend any deadline or the implementation of a resolution.
Legal sources
Law on Proceedings before Administrative Courts, especially Articles 61, 152 and 194; Act of 15 May 2024, Article 30(4); Act on the Professions of Doctor and Dentist. This article provides general information. An individual case requires a review of its documents.
Featured photograph (illustrative): Jacek Halicki, 2023 Stetoskop, Wikimedia Commons. CC BY-SA 4.0. Resized and cropped under the same licence.
