Exceeding the permitted speed by more than 50 km/h in a built-up area is one of the few road traffic misdemeanours that automatically triggers a driving licence seizure procedure – regardless of whether the check was carried out by a police officer on the road or the photograph was taken by a speed camera. Drivers often do not know how this procedure works, what rights they have or whether it can be challenged.
The Legal Basis – Two Stages
The seizure of a driving licence for exceeding the speed limit by more than 50 km/h in a built-up area proceeds in two stages and involves two different authorities.
Stage one – seizure by the police. Article 135(1)(1a) of the Road Traffic Act requires a police officer to seize the driving licence where a driver exceeds the permitted speed by more than 50 km/h in a built-up area. The officer issues a receipt entitling the driver to continue driving for 24 hours.
Stage two – the district authority’s decision. Under Article 102(1)(4) of the Act on Drivers, the district authority (starosta) competent for the driver’s place of residence issues a decision to seize the driving licence for a period of three months. The decision is issued with an order for immediate enforcement – meaning it takes effect at once, regardless of any appeal.
What a Built-Up Area Is
Article 2(15) of the Road Traffic Act defines a built-up area as an area marked with the relevant road signs (sign D-42 “built-up area” on entry and D-43 “end of built-up area” on exit). Exceeding the speed limit by more than 50 km/h outside a built-up area does not trigger automatic licence seizure under this administrative procedure – though it may have other consequences.
Importantly, the boundary is defined by the road signs, not by the actual development of the area. There are situations where a driver exceeded the speed limit in a place that looks like an unbuilt area but is formally covered by sign D-42. The legal status of the measurement location is relevant to the validity of the seizure.
Speed Camera versus Police Officer – Different Procedures
Measurement by a police officer on the road. The officer stops the driver, takes the measurement and seizes the licence on the spot, issuing a receipt. The driver may continue driving for 24 hours.
Speed camera measurement. The photograph goes to the Centre for Automated Traffic Supervision (CANARD), which sends a request for punishment or a notification to the district authority. In this case the licence is not seized on the spot – the driver receives a notification by post. The district authority issues an administrative decision after receiving information about the offence.
With a speed camera, the driver has more time to prepare arguments before the district authority issues its decision.
Appeal Against the District Authority’s Decision
The district authority’s decision to seize the driving licence is an administrative decision against which an appeal lies to the Regional Administrative Appeals Board (SKO) within 14 days of its service.
A critical point: the decision is issued with an order for immediate enforcement. This means that lodging an appeal does not automatically suspend its operation – the licence remains seized during the appeal proceedings, unless the SKO or an administrative court suspends enforcement of the decision.
An application for suspension of enforcement can be submitted to the SKO at the same time as the appeal – if the SKO grants it, the driver may drive until the appeal is resolved.
On What Grounds Can the Decision Be Successfully Challenged?
The district authority’s decision is a bound decision – if the speed excess has been established, the authority is required to issue it. The scope for challenge relates primarily to the following.
The reliability of the measurement. Did the measuring device hold a valid calibration certificate? Was the measurement carried out in accordance with the required procedure? For handheld radar devices – from what distance and at what angle was the measurement taken? The calibration and certification documentation should be available in the case file.
The location of the measurement. Did the speed excess occur in a built-up area? Were the D-42 signs correctly positioned and visible?
Identification of the driver. In speed camera cases – does the photograph unambiguously identify the driver?
Procedural correctness. Did the licence seizure procedure comply with the applicable rules?
What Happens If You Drive During the Seizure Period
Driving during the period of a driving licence seizure imposed by an administrative decision of the district authority is a criminal offence under Article 180a of the Criminal Code, carrying a custodial sentence of up to two years. This is not a misdemeanour – it is a full criminal offence, recorded in the National Criminal Register.
The receipt issued by the police officer entitles the driver to drive for 24 hours from the seizure only. After that – and until the three-month seizure period expires – driving is a criminal offence.
Penalty Points and Their Consequences
Exceeding the speed limit by more than 50 km/h in a built-up area results in 15 penalty points being recorded. Exceeding the 24-point limit leads to the district authority revoking the driving entitlement (Article 7(1)(2) of the Act on Drivers). Points are recorded regardless of the licence seizure decision.
Contact Us
If you have received a decision seizing your driving licence for a speed excess, or wish to challenge that decision, it is worth consulting a lawyer as soon as possible – the appeal deadline is only 14 days.
It pays to be properly prepared: both in knowing what you can claim and in having a clear strategy.
We handle cases for drivers in Poznań and across the Wielkopolska region, with in-person and online consultations available for clients elsewhere in Poland.
Adwokat Marta Krzyżanowicz and Adwokat Michalina Koligot Law Firm “Adwokat dla Kierowców w Poznaniu”
ul. Adama Mickiewicza 18/3, 60-834 Poznań
tel. +48 795 001 536 · +48 531 335 713
kontakt@adwokatdlakierowcy.pl · www.adwokatdlakierowcy.pl
This text is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case requires individual analysis.
