Attorney-at-Law (Radca Prawny) and Advocate (Adwokat): What, If Anything, Distinguishes These Professions?

What prompted me to write on this subject was a reality check. Specifically, two events.

The first was connected with law classes that we ran, on behalf of our Law Firm, at an upper-secondary school. To the question "what is the difference between the work of an advocate (adwokat) and that of an attorney-at-law (radca prawny)", the following answers were given: "we don't know", "an attorney-at-law reviews contracts and an advocate appears in court", "an advocate defends clients and an attorney-at-law advises them".

The second was a situation in which, after I had carried out for a client of the law firm a series of tasks such as giving legal advice, analysing contracts and preparing a legal opinion, I received a telephone call from this person one day with the question: "Counsel, I have been sued, and you look after my legal affairs. Can you recommend someone who will go to court with me?".

Given that we, attorneys-at-law, spend half of our professional lives in court, representing our clients in the courtroom, situations like those described above, which reflect low public awareness of what an attorney-at-law does and what powers an attorney-at-law has, had to result in this subject being raised on our blog.

Who Is an Attorney-at-Law?

To answer the question posed at the beginning:

Attorneys-at-law and advocates are professional representatives, members of two different self-governing professional bodies (the advocates' bar and the bar of attorneys-at-law). To obtain the right to practise either of these professions, the following conditions must be met: as a rule, completing 5-year law studies, then a so-called 3-year traineeship (aplikacja) ending with a professional examination lasting several days, and then being entered on the list of attorneys-at-law or advocates. Attorneys-at-law and advocates are bound by a code of professional ethics, are subject to compulsory insurance, bear disciplinary liability and are obliged to observe rules such as professional secrecy.

See also: Banking law (in Polish)

Today there is essentially no difference between practising as an attorney-at-law and as an advocate. Both professional titles are equivalent and entitle their holders to represent natural persons, legal persons and organisational units before all courts, in cases of every kind (criminal, civil, family, administrative and so on).

Attorney-at-Law and Advocate: The Differences

So what about the differences? Only two can be listed:

• the colour of the jabot. An attorney-at-law can be recognised by a blue jabot, and an advocate by a green one,
• an advocate may not practise under an employment relationship, so you will not find an advocate on a salaried "post" in a public office, while an attorney-at-law may not act as defence counsel in a criminal case if employed under an employment contract.

See also: Free credit sanction (in Polish)

That is all there is to the differences.

With the above in mind, the question arises why the professions of advocate and attorney-at-law have not been merged. This would undoubtedly benefit clients using professional legal assistance. For now, however, the division remains.

Mecenas, Prawnik or Doradca Prawny?

It is also worth pointing out that the following terms are in circulation for persons providing legal services: mecenas, prawnik (lawyer) and doradca prawny (legal adviser). Who is who?

To clear up this terminological confusion:

• a "doradca prawny" (legal adviser) is a person without an additional professional title, such as that of attorney-at-law or advocate. Such a person is not entitled to use the title of attorney-at-law or advocate, and therefore not entitled to run an attorney-at-law's office or an advocate's office. The words "legal advisory firm", "law firm", "compensation firm" and the like indicate that the services are provided by persons who are not attorneys-at-law or advocates.

See also: Business law (in Polish)

• close to the above is the term "prawnik" (lawyer), which can be used for any person who has completed law studies. A lawyer is therefore an attorney-at-law or an advocate, but also a prosecutor, a notary or a judge, regardless of the fact that they have obtained the right to practise a specific legal profession. A person without an additional professional title, such as that of attorney-at-law or advocate, is also a lawyer. Such a person may run a business giving legal advice and drafting contracts or opinions, but is not entitled to use the title of attorney-at-law or advocate, and therefore not entitled to run an attorney-at-law's office or an advocate's office. A lawyer without the qualifications of an attorney-at-law or advocate, offering services through a firm that is not an advocate's or attorney-at-law's office, will not be able to represent a client in court, and is not bound by a number of rules applying to attorneys-at-law and advocates, such as the duty to comply with the Codes of Professional Ethics, from which obligations towards clients arise. Nor, unlike attorneys-at-law and advocates, is such a person bound by a duty of strict professional secrecy, subject to compulsory civil liability insurance or subject to disciplinary liability.
• the term "mecenas" is not a professional title but only a courtesy form of address, used for both attorneys-at-law and advocates, and often also for trainees in these legal professions.

Advocate and Attorney-at-Law: Summary

It is worth remembering that:

1. as a rule, there are no differences between advocates and attorneys-at-law as professional representatives,
2. an attorney-at-law, as a professional representative, represents clients in court,
3. an attorney-at-law can be recognised by the blue jabot on the robe.

Finally, since the difference between an advocate and an attorney-at-law really comes down to the colour of the jabot on the robe, let us end this discussion on a humorous note with a poem by Jan Brzechwa, Kolory (Colours). In it a painter puzzles over what colours mean and overhears them arguing in a dye works: when the argument turns to blue, blue replies that each of them will fade in time, and green only adds that it hopes so.

Legal basis:

1. Act of 6 July 1982 on Attorneys-at-Law (consolidated text: Journal of Laws of 2018, item 2115, as amended)
2. Act of 26 May 1982: Law on the Bar (consolidated text: Journal of Laws of 2018, item 1184, as amended)