Sadkowski I Wspólnicy represents clients in all types of commercial disputes, from negotiation and mediation to complex litigation and arbitration. Mariusz Kowolik represents both corporate clients and individuals in cases involving commercial contracts, shareholder conflicts, financial and regulatory liability and cross-border litigation.
Legal 500 Editorial commentary

Accolades

Client satisfaction: Lawyer & team quality
Client satisfaction: Billing & efficiency

Testimonials

Collated independently by Legal 500 research team.

  • ‘The individuals at this firm distinguish themselves through a rare combination of professionalism, legal acumen, and personal commitment.'
  • ‘Cooperation with the dispute resolution team under the leadership of Mariusz Kowolik has been an excellent experience. Mariusz is an outstanding team leader – he combines strong legal expertise with strategic thinking and a practical understanding of the realities of litigation in Poland.’
  • ‘Given how lengthy court proceedings in Poland can be, it is crucial to have lawyers who stay attentive and proactive at every stage. The Sadkowski & Partners team stands out in this respect – they are highly organised, consistently meet deadlines, and remain fully engaged even during protracted cases. What I value most is their transparent communication and the assurance that we are regularly updated on the progress of our matters.’
  • ‘High quality of professional preparation to ordered tasks.’
  • ‘Proficiency and wide legal experience.’
  • ‘The Sadkowski law firm team consists of lawyers with various specialisations and experience gained while working in other law firms or other companies, which is very important.'

Key clients

  • EUSA Consulting s.r.o.
  • WARS S.A.
  • AGMET Sp. z o.o.
  • IPAK Sp. z o.o.
  • Quercus TFI S.A.
  • Grzegorz Wydmanski 77 Aviation

Work highlights

Representing IPAK Sp. z o.o. in EUR 3m litigation against a printing machine manufacturer.
Representing Grzegorz Wydmanski 77 Aviation in a court case concerning an alleged violation of a non-compete clause following the termination of its business relationship with a company providing aircraft charter services, and an alleged act of unfair competition.
Practice head

Mariusz Kowolik