My Spouse Is at Fault for Our Marriage Breaking Down – Can They Still Force Through a Divorce in Poland?

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

This is one of the most emotionally charged situations in divorce proceedings: the spouse whose behaviour caused the marriage to fall apart is now demanding a divorce – while the other party, the one who was wronged, refuses to agree. Can that refusal block the proceedings? Sometimes yes. But not always. And it is that “not always” that this article is about.

Table of Contents

1. What the law says – Article 56 § 3 of the Family and Guardianship Code
2. When does a refusal lose its legal protection?
3. The “dead marriage” concept – why courts take it seriously
4. The breakdown of all marital bonds – what this means in practice
5. Serious harm as a counterweight – when a refusal can still succeed
6. How it all fits together – two conditions at once
7. FAQ

What the Law Says – Article 56 § 3 of the Family and Guardianship Code

Let us start with the legal basis. Under Article 56 § 3 of the Polish Family and Guardianship Code (Kodeks rodzinny i opiekuńczy), if a divorce is sought by the spouse who is exclusively at fault for the breakdown of the marriage, the court will as a rule dismiss the claim – unless one of two circumstances applies: either the other spouse agrees to the divorce, or their refusal to agree is, in the given circumstances, contrary to the principles of social coexistence (zasady współżycia społecznego).

That last phrase sounds abstract. In practice, however, it means something very concrete: the court will assess whether insisting on maintaining a marriage that has ceased to function in any real sense still serves a legitimate purpose – or whether it has simply become a tool of pressure.

When Does a Refusal Lose Its Legal Protection?

The Court of Appeal in Poznań addressed this directly in its judgment in case I ACa 230/19:

“Taking into account that the conflict between the parties is exceptionally deep, manifesting itself in physical altercations, verbal abuse and police interventions, it was necessary to conclude that the defendant’s refusal to consent to the divorce is contrary to the principles of social coexistence.”

The word “exceptionally” is significant here. Courts do not expect divorcing spouses to maintain civil relations – but when conflict escalates to physical violence and repeated police call-outs, maintaining the formal bond of marriage ceases to serve any defensible purpose. More than that: it starts to be assessed as contrary to the principles of social coexistence.

The “Dead Marriage” Concept – Why Courts Take It Seriously

In the same judgment, the Court of Appeal in Poznań added an important observation:

“One may speak of a refusal to grant a divorce to the non-guilty spouse being contrary to the principles of social coexistence when its effect would be the continuation of a ‘dead’ marriage, which must be considered socially undesirable.”

The term “dead marriage” is not a legal definition, but it captures the essence of the problem precisely. It describes a situation in which a marriage exists only on paper – with no shared life, no emotional connection, no realistic prospect of recovery. Maintaining it in that state serves neither the spouses, nor their children, nor – as courts consistently hold – society more broadly.

This matters practically for anyone considering whether opposing a divorce makes sense as a long-term strategy. If the marriage has genuinely ceased to function and this can be demonstrated, the refusal may be overridden by the court on precisely these grounds.

The Breakdown of All Marital Bonds – What This Means in Practice

Before a court can conclude that a marriage is “dead,” it must establish that all three bonds that traditionally constitute marital life have broken down. The Court of Appeal in Poznań stated this explicitly in the cited judgment:

“All the bonds connecting the spouses (physical, psychological, economic) have been severed between the parties, and this state has persisted for years. The breakdown of the marriage is therefore permanent.”

What does this look like in practice?

Emotional bond – no affection, no mutual interest, no support. The parties treat each other as strangers or, worse, as adversaries.

Physical bond – the absence of shared intimate life. Courts approach this with discretion, but it is one of the elements taken into account.

Economic bond – no shared household, separated finances, no joint plans or investments. The spouses function economically as two entirely separate individuals.

The breakdown of these bonds alone is not sufficient – it must have persisted for a substantial period of time, and there must be no realistic prospect of a return to normal married life.

Serious Harm as a Counterweight – When a Refusal Can Still Succeed

Here is an important qualification that must not be overlooked. Even where a marriage is effectively “dead” and the conflict between the parties is deep and longstanding, the court will always check simultaneously whether granting the divorce would cause serious harm (rażąca krzywda) to the spouse who is refusing consent (Article 56 § 2 of the Family and Guardianship Code).

In case I ACa 230/19, the court assessed this as follows:

“The intensity of the negative emotions between the parties, including the defendant’s attitude towards the plaintiff and her capacity to earn income, provides no basis for concluding that granting the divorce – despite the defendant’s objection – would cause her serious harm.”

Two elements are key here. First: the intensity of the conflict between the spouses itself weakens the argument about emotional harm – it is difficult to argue convincingly that the dissolution of a deeply toxic relationship constitutes harm. Second: the ability of the opposing spouse to support themselves financially after the divorce carries real weight. If that spouse can take up employment and has not demonstrated objective obstacles to doing so, the financial hardship argument is weakened considerably.

How It All Fits Together – Two Conditions at Once

To bring this together: a court will grant a divorce despite the objection of the non-guilty spouse when two conditions are met simultaneously.

The first: the refusal of consent is contrary to the principles of social coexistence – because the marriage is “dead,” the conflict is deep and permanent, and maintaining the formal bond no longer serves any legitimate purpose.

The second: granting the divorce will not cause serious harm to the objecting spouse – because their financial, health and housing situation does not give rise to such a conclusion.

Both conditions must be satisfied together. The legal framework is clear – but the assessment of the specific circumstances always rests with the court.

FAQ

Can the non-guilty spouse always block a divorce in Poland? Not always. If their refusal of consent is contrary to the principles of social coexistence – which is the case, among other situations, where the marriage has effectively ceased to exist and a deep, permanent conflict is present – the court may grant the divorce despite the objection.

What does the spouse at fault need to prove in order to obtain a divorce over the other party’s objection? Primarily, they must demonstrate that the other spouse’s refusal is contrary to the principles of social coexistence. In practice, this means showing that the marriage is “dead” – that all marital bonds have broken down, that this state has persisted for a substantial time, and that there is no realistic prospect of improvement. Witness testimony, records of police interventions and a history of communication between the parties are all relevant evidence here.

Does domestic violence automatically mean the objection will be overruled? Not automatically – but it is a very strong factor. The judgment in I ACa 230/19 of the Court of Appeal in Poznań confirms that deep conflict manifesting itself in physical altercations and police interventions is treated by courts as a circumstance pointing strongly towards a finding that the refusal is contrary to the principles of social coexistence.

What if the non-guilty spouse refuses on religious or moral grounds? Religious and moral convictions are understood and respected – but they do not on their own constitute a legal basis for dismissing the claim. The court assesses the objective situation of the marriage, not the parties’ personal beliefs. If all the relevant criteria point to a complete and permanent breakdown of the marriage, and the refusal is contrary to the principles of social coexistence, the court will grant the divorce.

How long do these proceedings typically take when the non-guilty spouse objects? Significantly longer than in cases where both parties are in agreement. The court must thoroughly examine the factual circumstances and may appoint expert witnesses. In practice, proceedings of this kind are measured in years rather than months – which is itself a factor worth considering when planning a legal strategy.

I am a foreign national living in Poland – does all of this apply to me? Yes, provided Polish courts have jurisdiction over your case, which is generally the case if you are habitually resident in Poland. The rules described in this article apply regardless of nationality. One thing worth noting: the distinction between the “guilty” and “non-guilty” spouse in Polish divorce law can come as a surprise to people from legal systems where fault plays no role in divorce proceedings. If your spouse has indicated they will contest the divorce – or if you are the one considering whether to object – taking legal advice early is particularly important.

Can this situation be resolved through mediation? Mediation is always an option worth exploring, and courts actively encourage it in family proceedings. In practice, however, cases involving deeply entrenched conflict, a history of violence or long-standing complete breakdown of the marriage are often difficult to resolve through mediation alone. That said, even partial agreement reached through mediation – for example on financial matters or arrangements for children – can meaningfully reduce the length and cost of the proceedings.

Do you need legal help with divorce proceedings in Poland? Call: +48 531 335 713 or email: kancelaria@prawnikodrozwodu.pl

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every family law case is individual and requires analysis of the specific circumstances and documents involved. The law firm accepts no liability for actions taken on the basis of the information contained in this article. For legal advice tailored to your situation, please contact our office.

Kancelaria Prawa Rodzinnego (Family Law Office): Adwokat Michalina Koligot, Adwokat Marta Krzyżanowicz, Adwokat Anna Konrady, Radca prawny Joanna Jędrzejewska ul. Mickiewicza 18a/3, 60-834 Poznań | tel. +48 531 335 713 | kancelaria@prawnikodrozwodu.pl | www.prawnikodrozwodu.pl