The death of a loved one due to an unfortunate accident is undoubtedly one of the most traumatic experiences that can happen to anyone. Such an event leaves a permanent mark on the psyche of the person affected, often causing measurable deterioration in their physical health.
The death of a mother or child leaves an indelible imprint. While nothing can fully compensate for such a loss, Polish law provides mechanisms to alleviate the extent of the misfortune. If you have been a victim of such a situation, you may seek appropriate compensation and damages from the person responsible. Although the process of obtaining these is neither simple nor easy, it is worth pursuing—one-time compensation for the death of a loved one can significantly aid in coping with the trauma experienced. This article aims to assist you with this.
From this post, you will learn:
- On what legal basis can you assert your rights in the event of a loved one’s death?
- What can you claim for the death of a loved one?
- Who is entitled to compensation for the death of a loved one?
- Who are the closest family members of the deceased?
- What does the term “deceased person” mean?
- What constitutes “significant deterioration of living conditions”?
- What other benefits are available to those entitled in connection with the death of a loved one?
- What is compensatory annuity?
- What does the obligation to reimburse medical and funeral costs entail?
- On what principles does the responsible party for a loved one’s death bear liability?
- FAQ
On what legal basis can you assert your rights in the event of a loved one’s death?
The first issue to address is: on what legal basis can you assert your rights in the event of a loved one’s death and claim financial support for the loss of a parent, in-law, or other family members?
What legal provisions allow you to receive compensation for the death of a loved one? On what grounds can you demand compensation for the death of, for instance, a brother or husband?
The answers are contained in the provisions of the Polish Civil Code, specifically Article 446. From this article, it follows…
What can you claim for the death of a loved one?
If the death of a loved one occurred due to an event for which a third party is responsible, you are entitled under the Civil Code to specific civil claims. These include the right to:
- Compensation (Article 446 §3 of the Civil Code),
- Redress for non-material harm suffered (Article 446 §4 of the Civil Code),
- Other benefits (Article 446 §1 and §2 of the Civil Code).
Who is entitled to compensation for the death of a loved one?
Unfortunately, compensation is not available in every case of a loved one’s death. The applicable regulations explicitly state that the court may award appropriate compensation only if:
- The claimant is among the closest family members of the deceased,
- And the death has resulted in a significant deterioration of their living situation.
Who are the Closest Family Members of the Deceased?
Who qualifies as “close persons” in the context of compensation and redress for the death of a loved one? Legally, the concept of “closest family members,” which applies in this context, is significantly narrower than the broader category of “close persons.”
This distinction is determined by the existence of a familial-legal relationship between the deceased and the person entitled to compensation. In other words, they must be members of the same family. But what does this mean? While it seems straightforward and obvious, in the realm of legal considerations, it is far from simple.
You should know that no legal provision defines the term “family.” It is generally accepted that family is the smallest social group, united by a sense of closeness and commonality, both personal and economic. Interestingly, this connection does not necessarily stem from kinship alone.
It includes relationships such as Kinship, Marriage, Adoption, Affinity, Foster family relationships, and Cohabitation in a shared household. Cohabitation and Shared Living Cohabitation refers to the daily cooperation of individuals aimed at better meeting their living needs, including housing, food, and income. Shared living is a prerequisite for recognizing individuals as a family if there is also an element of joint management of household duties. This involves the division of tasks associated with proper household management.
Family bonds cannot be equated solely with biological descent. Such bonds do not arise automatically between biologically related individuals or through legal acts such as marriage or adoption. They require a certain degree of emotional engagement between the individuals involved, which develops and evolves over time.
The nature of kinship and affinity relationships is explicitly defined in the Family and Guardianship Code.
According to this Code:
- Direct kinship refers to individuals where one descends from the other.
- Collateral kinship refers to individuals who share a common ancestor but are not directly descended from one another.
The degree of kinship is determined by the number of births that resulted in the relationship.
Affinity, on the other hand, arises between a spouse and the relatives of the other spouse. Importantly, affinity persists even after the dissolution of a marriage, and its line and degree correspond to the kinship of the spouse.
Family vs. Close Persons
Now that you understand the concept of “family,” it’s important to clarify who within this framework holds the status of “closest person.”
In criminal law, there is a specific catalogue of individuals defined as “closest.” These include:
- Spouses,
- Ascendants (e.g., parents, grandparents, great-grandparents),
- Descendants (e.g., children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren),
- Siblings,
- Affines in the same line or degree,
- Individuals in adoptive relationships and their spouses,
- Individuals in cohabitation.
Unfortunately, criminal law provisions can only be applied to civil law relationships in an auxiliary capacity. For this reason, the question of who belongs to the “closest family members” category has been extensively addressed in civil court jurisprudence. The case law indicates that this issue should be treated broadly, leaving the decision of who qualifies to the discretion of the adjudicating court. Ultimately, the determination depends on the specific circumstances of the case and the court’s perspective.
The following are generally recognized as the closest family members: Direct descendants (e.g., children) and ascendants (e.g., parents), Spouses, Siblings. Thus, compensation for the death of a parent, child, spouse, or sibling is unquestionably valid. According to the Supreme Court, the category also includes stepmothers in situations where positive social values justify the relationship, such as when the stepmother has cared for the child from a young age and treated them as her own, providing love and care.
The Supreme Court has further stated that a closest family member does not necessarily have to be the closest relative. Kinship is neither the sole nor primary criterion for determining closeness or family membership. Instead, the nature of the relationship between the individuals involved is crucial, rather than the formal sequence of kinship as defined by family law.
As such, being a closest person is determined by emotional and affectionate bonds rather than legal ties.
For a minor child, the closest family members are not only their parents and siblings but also other descendants they reside with. These individuals provide direct care, participate in the child’s upbringing, daily life, and significant events.
Similarly, for a nephew or niece, the closest family member could be an uncle or aunt (collateral relatives). A step-sibling or fiancé(e) may also qualify as a closest family member.
Cohabitation and Partners
A cohabiting partner unequivocally qualifies as a closest family member. From a legal perspective, cohabitation is an informal relationship between two individuals living together without the legal recognition of marriage. It is analogous to marriage but without a formalized legal bond. This includes the establishment of a domestic unit characterized by emotional, physical, and economic ties between partners.
Cohabitation involves a stable and enduring partnership, including shared household responsibilities. However, certain conditions apply—the Supreme Court has indicated that a cohabiting partner may only be considered a closest family member if the relationship does not harm other families or contravene social norms and if the relationship is stable and long-lasting.
Adoption, Guardianship, and Other Close Relationships
Legal forms of creating relationships that are equated with natural family ties, such as adoption or foster family arrangements, establish interpersonal connections that are treated as relationships of the closest kinship, especially between minors and their adoptive parents.
In certain cases, courts may even include colleagues in this category, provided there were unique, extraordinary bonds of friendship and mutual support between them.
Who is Considered a Close Person?
Summarizing the above considerations, the determination of who is the closest family member of the deceased depends on the actual familial relationship between the deceased and the persons considered “close” to them.
In any case, in matters of redress for harm suffered due to the death of a loved one, courts most frequently recognize the following as closest family members:
- Spouses,
- Parents,
- Children,
- Siblings,
- Grandparents,
- Grandchildren,
- Cohabiting partners,
- Fiancés or fiancées,
- Children of a cohabiting partner.
However, it cannot be predetermined who might be considered the closest family member or who definitively cannot hold such a status. Such determinations can only be made by a court after thoroughly examining the specific circumstances and conditions of the particular case.
In conclusion, compensation for the death of a parent, adult child, grandparent, sibling, or in-law is generally certain, while compensation for the death of a partner’s parent is less clear but not impossible.
What Does the Term “Deceased Person” Mean?
Under the Civil Code, the cause of a victim’s death can be:
- Bodily injury, or
- Health disorder.
Bodily injury refers to any disruption to the physical integrity of the human body, causing destruction or a break in the continuity of body tissues or organs. This may include wounds, fractures, or the loss of body parts.
Health disorder refers to a state of dysfunction in the body’s organs caused by external factors, without visible damage. It involves improper functioning of the human body by impairing systems or subsystems, such as the nervous system or digestive system. It may result from bodily injury or arise independently.
The above explains the causes of human death, but it raises the question: what does Polish law define as a “deceased person”?
It is assumed that a deceased person is any human being deprived of life. The Supreme Court has indicated that a deceased person is someone who lived, even for a brief moment, thereby acquiring legal capacity or who was capable of independent life. Legal capacity, in this context, refers to the ability to be a subject of civil rights and obligations.
This issue is particularly significant in the context of seeking redress for the death of a child before birth. This is discussed in detail in the article: “Compensation and Redress for the Death of an Unborn Child.“
Everyone is equal before the law. Effective lawyer makes the difference
What Constitutes “Significant Deterioration of Living Conditions”?
As previously mentioned, the right to compensation for the death of a loved one depends not only on the familial relationship with the deceased but also on a significant deterioration of the living conditions of those affected by the death.
What Does This Mean in Practice?
The death of a close person is undoubtedly one of the most traumatic experiences an individual can face. Such an event leaves a lasting mark on the psyche of the affected person and often leads to deterioration in both mental and physical health. It causes harm manifesting as health disorders resulting from stress and grief caused by the death of a loved one. Thus, the closest person to the deceased is, by nature, an indirectly affected party.
The Supreme Court has stated that when the deterioration of health negatively affects all aspects of life—leading to loss of energy, vitality, and motivation to pursue education, acquire qualifications, or work—it reduces efficiency in earning income, accumulating resources, and diminishes future prospects. These circumstances undoubtedly constitute a significant deterioration of living conditions, producing clearly noticeable economic consequences that can only be compensated through appropriate damages.
This deterioration may not only involve a reduction in the claimant’s current material situation but also limitations on their ability to improve their living conditions in the future and restrict their life plans.
It is essential to note that the deterioration of living conditions should not be simplified to merely a decrease in income or an increase in expenses for the deceased’s closest family members. Material damages leading to a significant decline in the present or future living conditions of the deceased’s closest person are often intangible or challenging to calculate. They frequently arise from reduced vitality and the adverse effects of the death on the affected person’s psyche and physical condition, which may not necessarily manifest as a specific illness.
Significant deterioration of living conditions may also involve the deprivation of the practical support previously provided by the deceased loved one. The material aspect of such support encompasses relieving the claimant of the need to cover certain costs. This support could take the form of providing food, hygiene products, household management, direct care, or assistance in various areas such as education, professional work, business activities, repairs, and property maintenance, including paying for vehicle insurance.
How is the Extent of Deterioration in Living Conditions Assessed?
The court adjudicating the case evaluates whether there has been a significant deterioration of living conditions for the deceased’s closest family members. The court considers individual factors, particularly:
- The scale of negative material consequences for the indirectly affected person,
- Their health, age, living conditions, and the family and financial environment,
- A comparison of the current situation of the claimant with the state they would have been in had the death not occurred.
Functions and Amounts of Compensation and Redress for the Death of a Loved One
Compensation and redress for the death of a loved one serve specific legal functions. Courts also follow strictly defined principles when determining their amounts.
Due to the breadth of this subject, these matters are discussed in a separate article: “Functions and Amounts of Compensation and Redress for the Death of a Loved One.“
For this reason, this article will focus solely on a previously mentioned topic, namely…
What Other Benefits Are Available to Those Entitled in Connection with the Death of a Loved One?
As discussed earlier, individuals affected by the death of a loved one are entitled to benefits beyond appropriate compensation and redress.
These additional benefits are specified in Article 446 §1 and §2 of the Civil Code and take the form of:
- Compensatory annuities,
- Reimbursement of medical and funeral expenditures
Compensatory Annuity
Individuals entitled to claim a compensatory annuity from the party responsible for repairing the damage include:
- Persons to whom the deceased had a statutory obligation of support (mandatory annuity). Generally, the obligation of support applies to direct relatives and siblings, as well as individuals legally connected to the deceased, such as their spouse.
- Other close persons, to whom the deceased voluntarily and consistently provided means of subsistence, if circumstances indicate that such support is justified by principles of social coexistence (optional annuity).
It is important to note that, under jurisprudence, a “close person” may be:
- A relative,
- An affine (in-law) – regardless of the degree of kinship or affinity,
- Another individual who had a close factual relationship with the deceased, such as emotional bonds or cohabitation, e.g., a partner, foster children, or a child residing in an institutional facility who maintained regular contact with the deceased.
The support provided by the deceased must have been intended to sustain the individual receiving it, ensuring their subsistence. These resources cannot have been allocated for other purposes, such as professional activities. However, “means of support” should be interpreted broadly—they are not limited to covering daily living expenses but also include meeting needs related to education, cultural life, caregiving, leisure, health, and medical treatment. It is also irrelevant whether the support was provided in monetary form or in kind. Voluntary provision of support means that the deceased was not legally obligated to provide it.
What Determines the Amount of a Compensatory Annuity Following the Death of a Loved One?
The compensatory annuity is calculated based on:
- The needs of the claimant, and
- The earning and financial potential of the deceased during the probable duration of their obligation to provide support.
Since the first criterion is not specifically limited, it may encompass all the claimant’s needs that were genuinely met by the deceased and are now unmet due to their death.
This includes not only “justified needs”—those essential for maintaining a normal, average standard of living suitable to the claimant’s health and age—but also needs of a more abstract nature, such as cultural enrichment, access to books, or appropriate entertainment.
The deceased’s earning potential refers to the income they could have achieved using their physical and mental capacities to the fullest. Financial potential refers to assets—not only those the deceased possessed but also those they could have acquired through proper management and utilization of their capabilities.
These “potentials” are not equivalent to the actual income the deceased earned; rather, they represent their earning capacity—the income they could and should have achieved.
Calculating these potentials often involves hypothetical assessments, as the determination is not necessarily based on the income the deceased had before their death but on their capacity to earn a higher income. Courts often base their determination on actual earnings when these accurately reflect the deceased’s potential.
In all cases, the assessment must be grounded in realistic considerations, demonstrating that the deceased would, with a high degree of probability, have achieved the specified earnings. When calculating the deceased’s earning and financial potential, the court must also consider the amounts they allocated to meet their own needs. If the claimant’s needs exceed the deceased’s earning and financial potential, the annuity is adjusted accordingly, meaning it is reduced.
Other Factors Affecting the Amount of Compensatory Annuity
When determining the amount of the annuity, the court also considers factors such as:
- The deceased’s contribution to the event that caused their death,
- The claimant’s contribution to the occurrence or worsening of the harm they suffered.
In such cases, the annuity is proportionally reduced.
The annuity is compensatory in nature. It compensates for the loss suffered by the individual entitled to support due to the inability to receive the means necessary to meet all their needs. Its purpose is restitution, as far as possible, of the state of affairs that existed before the event causing the harm—in this case, the death of a loved one. It aims to redress material harm, ensuring the claimant’s subsistence.
If more than one individual is entitled to the annuity, each claimant has an independent right to it, provided they meet the specified criteria. A joint annuity cannot be granted to multiple claimants.
The compensatory annuity may also be capitalized. For valid reasons, the court may, at the claimant’s request, award them a one-time compensation instead of the annuity or part of it. The amount is determined based on the due compensatory annuity and the probable duration of the payment obligation.
It is also worth noting that the right to the annuity, as a right strictly tied to the individual claimant, expires upon their death and is not included in their estate. However, claims for unpaid annuity installments due before the claimant’s death are inheritable.
Reimbursement of Medical and Funeral Expenses
Under applicable laws, if a victim’s death results from bodily injury or a health disorder, the party responsible for the harm must reimburse the medical and funeral expenses incurred by the person who bore them. In practice, these are usually the deceased’s close relatives.
Reimbursement of Medical Expenses
This includes all expenses incurred for the victim’s treatment, provided they were justified by current medical knowledge. This covers hospitalization, necessary surgeries, doctor visits, nursing care, rehabilitation, and costs of medicines, bandages, and other medical supplies.
The costs must reflect real chances of improving the victim’s health, including justified private treatment expenses. A victim has the right to take all measures most effectively improving their health, even if these involve paid medical services.
Reimbursement of Funeral Expenses
Reimbursement for funeral expenses broadly covers costs associated with burying the deceased. This includes transporting the body, purchasing a coffin, and securing a burial site, as well as customary expenses such as erecting a headstone (within reasonable costs), floral arrangements, and mourning attire. It also includes expenses for a reception following the funeral, as this is a widespread custom, especially if practiced in the community. Costs related to such receptions, within reasonable limits, are reimbursed equally with other funeral expenses.
Liability of the Party Responsible for a Loved One’s Death
The party responsible for paying compensation, redress, and other entitlements to those indirectly harmed by the death of a loved one is the perpetrator of the event causing these consequences. Their liability is classified as tortious, arising from their wrongful act or omission.
In civil law, a tort is defined as an act or omission resulting in harm or an event for which the law imposes liability. In Polish civil law, the perpetrator’s liability is determined based on:
- Fault,
- Risk, or
- Equity.
Principle of Fault
The principle of fault stipulates that the obligation to remedy damage rests with the perpetrator if their actions were unlawful. This may result from a direct violation of binding legal provisions or from failure to adhere to generally accepted principles of caution and foresight. However, the action must be fully intentional, meaning the perpetrator must have had the full capacity to independently manage their behavior at the time of the act. Consequently, the perpetrator must bear full and unequivocal responsibility for the damage they caused. An example is liability for medical malpractice.
For more information, I recommend reading my articles:
Principle of Risk
The principle of risk implies that a perpetrator is liable for the damage solely because they operate certain devices or systems dangerous to others, or because they employ individuals in the course of their activities—even if they were not personally at fault. An example is the liability of a motor vehicle owner who hits a pedestrian, resulting in the pedestrian’s death.
Principle of Equity
The principle of equity provides legal protection to the injured party in situations where there is no basis to claim compensation under general principles, but significant reasons (including moral considerations) justify compensating the harm suffered.
Causal Link
It is important to understand that a necessary condition for liability in damages is the existence of an adequate and evident causal link between the harm suffered by the injured party and the perpetrator’s actions.
Who Is Liable for the Damage?
Damage can be caused to the injured party either directly or indirectly. Direct liability applies, for example, in the case of a perpetrator of a traffic accident or a person who physically struck the victim. Such individuals bear exclusive liability for damages. Indirect liability arises in situations where the perpetrator failed to fulfill their duties, thereby contributing to the event causing the damage. Examples include:
A doctor who fails to perform necessary diagnostic tests,
The owner of a facility who allows equipment within it to fall into disrepair (e.g., gym equipment),
Failing to maintain the facility’s surface in a safe condition, resulting in a hazard such as a slippery floor (e.g., at a swimming pool), leading to a tragic accident.
If the damage was directly caused by an employee of a given company, the employer bears the liability for damages. In cases where the damage was caused by a person performing tasks for a business or another entity under a civil law agreement (e.g., a contract for services), liability is joint and several—both the individual and the institution are responsible. This mechanism is explained in detail in my article: “Compensation for Medical Error.”
Liability of the Insurer
If the injured party had an insurance policy, the obligation to pay damages falls on the insurer—the insurance company that assumed such responsibility under the terms of the policy. This is known as “guarantee liability,” ensuring payment from the insurance policy following the victim’s death.
The liability of the perpetrator or insurer may be proportionally reduced if the injured party contributed to the damage or to the increased extent of harm. For instance, in the case of compensation for death in a car accident, the compensation amount is appropriately reduced if contributory negligence is found.
After reading this article, you likely understand how complex and intricate cases involving compensation and redress for the loss of a loved one can be. From determining the closeness of the relationship with the deceased to establishing fault for the death and calculating the amounts of compensation and ensuring their payment—specialized legal assistance from a law firm experienced in compensation cases can be invaluable. Contact us for assistance.
