Case 1.
During the course of the works, equipment left on the client’s property disappeared. However, the client claims that he is not concerned about this situation and is obstructing the investigation. What should be done in this case?
In our case, as we have already reported the theft to the police, we need not fear a lack of cooperation or even obstruction of the ongoing preliminary investigation on the part of the client. In the crime report we filed, apart from stating the time and place of the offence, we also had to describe the course of the entire incident in detail and identify any potential witnesses. If the police deem it necessary to question our client, he – despite any unwillingness to cooperate – will not be able to refuse. This is because a witness is obliged to attend whenever summoned by the investigating authority. A witness who, without justification, fails to appear when summoned by the investigating authority, or who leaves the scene of the proceedings before they are concluded without the authority’s permission, or who unreasonably evades giving evidence, may be fined up to 10,000 zlotys, and, furthermore, an order may be made for their detention and compulsory attendance.
Case 2.
Marcin lent some equipment to his friend Tomek. They agreed that Tomek would return it after two weeks. Three weeks have passed, and Marcin has had no contact with his friend. He suspects that Tomek has stolen his tools and is trying to abscond with them. What can Marcin do in this situation?
Firstly, it is worth noting that a contract of loan for use, colloquially and incorrectly referred to as a ‘loan’ or ‘rental’, is characterised by the fact that the lender transfers an item to the borrower for free use for a certain period. The legal aspects of a loan for use agreement are governed by the Civil Code (Articles 710–719), although the agreement may be concluded in any form, i.e. in writing or orally. In our case, given the civil law relationship between Marcin and Tomek, the latter, as the borrower, bears full liability for the theft or destruction of the lent item. Consequently, as the lender, and given the lack of contact with Tomek, Marcin should, in writing (by registered post with acknowledgement of receipt), demand either monetary compensation equal to the value of the lent item or the return of the same item as previously lent. If Tomek refuses to return the loaned item or its equivalent in cash, or if contact with him remains impossible, Marcin will have no option but to take legal action to pursue his claims. Therefore, for evidential purposes, it is far more advantageous to conclude a loan agreement (or any agreement) in writing.
Case 3.
Equipment is disappearing from Marek’s company car overnight. He suspects his employees, but has no evidence to support this. What steps can he take in this situation?
The lack of strong evidence that a crime has been committed means that Marek, as an employer acting solely on the basis of fears or assumptions, will not be able to impose consequences on employees for so-called employee theft (or other offences) in the form of disciplinary dismissal. Marek may, however, notify the law enforcement authorities. As part of the report regarding the possible commission of a crime, in addition to describing the course of events, he will also identify the persons suspected of committing it. Following the report, the police will, in the course of their preliminary investigation, either confirm or refute Marek’s suspicions, or possibly identify other perpetrators of the crime.
