Outsourcing of Legal Services

Outsourcing is a takeover of your entire legal function, or a chosen part of it — we act as your external legal department, not merely as an adviser you turn to with questions. Ongoing advisory answers the matters that come to us; outsourcing additionally takes on running the processes, watching deadlines, coordinating other advisers and reporting — the things an in-house department would normally handle.

In practice the difference lies in the scope of responsibility. With ongoing advisory you decide what to hand over; with outsourcing we agree on a whole area (for example all of employment law, or compliance) and make sure ourselves that nothing is missed. That is why outsourcing is most often chosen by companies that would otherwise have to hire their own lawyer or build a department.

The two forms can be combined and you can move smoothly between them. If you mainly want quick answers and support on everyday matters, start with ongoing legal advisory; if you want to hand an entire area or function outside, that is outsourcing. We set the boundary and the scope at the outset, using concrete examples from your company.

We usually work in one of several models — often in a combination of them — rather than a rigid taxonomy. Full outsourcing means handing over the whole legal department or a specific area (for example compliance or debt recovery) — we then take responsibility for the people, processes and documentation. Selective outsourcing (also called co-sourcing) means handing over only chosen services, while the rest of the function stays with you. Process outsourcing covers specific, recurring processes — for example handling commercial contracts or employment disputes.

The fourth model is hybrid: we do most of the work remotely, supported by a dedicated lawyer on secondment at your premises who coordinates everything with the day-to-day running of the company. This variant works well at larger scale, or when you want someone on hand without hiring them as an employee. Even while on secondment at your premises, the lawyer keeps their professional independence — they remain our lawyer, not your employee.

The models can be combined and changed over time — cooperation looks different in a quiet quarter and different during an acquisition, an inspection or entry into a new market. We start with what hurts most today and widen the scope as needs arise. The choice of model feeds directly into billing, so we agree it together before we begin.

For many small and medium-sized companies outsourcing works out cheaper than a hire, because you do not bear employment costs: salary, contributions, holidays, training, software and a workplace. You pay for an agreed scope of support rather than for one person being available eight hours a day — and at the same time you gain access to a whole team with different specialisations, not a single lawyer.

We bill in one of three models: a retainer (a fixed monthly fee for an agreed scope), an hour package (used flexibly) or per-project billing. We match the model to how often, and on what, you need us; they can also be combined. At the end of the month you get a clear statement of the work done — no phantom hours and no line items you do not understand.

The actual cost depends on the scope, which is why we give it after a short needs audit rather than off the top of our head. We always flag it in advance if a matter goes beyond the agreed scope, and give an estimate — you will not receive an invoice for something you did not agree to. That way the cost of legal support becomes predictable, rather than a function of how many fires broke out that month.

For most companies — yes. Outsourcing effectively replaces an in-house legal department or a lawyer on the payroll, while giving access to a team with broader competences than one person. We take on both the first-point-of-contact role on simple matters and the expert role on the harder ones that call for narrow specialisation.

In companies that already have their own lawyer, we act as support: we take on overflow matters, fields outside their specialisation, or cover during absences. Your in-house lawyer then gains the backing of the whole firm and does not have to be a specialist in everything.

In both cases the point is the same: to keep legal matters moving on an ongoing basis, with nobody putting them off for later. We set a clear division of responsibility — who runs what — and keep a single matter register, so at any moment it is clear what stage a given matter is at. The scope can be scaled up and down as the company grows.

The information you pass to us in connection with legal assistance is covered by the professional secrecy of the attorney-at-law and the advocate — a statutory duty, not merely a clause in a contract. With outsourcing, where we work on your data and systems, depending on the matter we act as the data controller or as a processor, so we additionally sign a data-processing agreement (GDPR) and, on request, a separate non-disclosure agreement (NDA).

We limit access to documents to the people actually working on your matters, and arrange it so that data does not circulate without need. Before we start, we also check for conflicts of interest — if we would be acting for parties with opposing interests, we will not take on the matter. We check for conflicts not only at the outset but throughout the cooperation, including as new group companies and counterparties appear. That is a basic rule of professional ethics.

Security also covers the way information is exchanged: we agree the contact channels and the rules for passing documents, and at the end of the cooperation we return or permanently delete data as agreed. Our professional liability is covered by mandatory indemnity insurance, and its scope is set in the contract. The secrecy also covers the very fact that you use our help — so you can give us the full picture of a matter, without which good advice is not possible.

We start with a short audit: we get to know your company, its most frequent matters, contract templates, key counterparties and pending proceedings. On that basis we agree the scope, the cooperation model and the response time. Onboarding is fast — we usually get going within a few days, and we spread a full takeover of a larger area over agreed stages.

Next we put the basics in order: the matter register, the contact channels and the place where we keep documents, so the history of each matter is at hand. We sign a cooperation agreement and, where we process data, a data-processing agreement. From then on you have a direct line to your dedicated lawyer.

You do not need months to prepare — it is enough to show us how you operate today. If you already have your own procedures, we adapt to them rather than imposing ours. We treat the first few weeks as bedding-in: asking about the details so that later we can run matters without unnecessary questions and without drawing you into things we can handle ourselves.

Yes — your work is led by a designated, consistent lawyer (an attorney-at-law or advocate) who knows your company, supported when needed by specialists in other fields and a support team. You do not get someone different every time and you do not have to explain a matter from scratch. This is your single point of contact, with the whole firm standing behind them.

When a matter calls for narrow specialisation — for example employment law, GDPR, tax or intellectual property — we bring in the right expert, but your dedicated lawyer keeps coordinating. In the hybrid model the dedicated lawyer can also be on secondment at your premises, if the scale of cooperation justifies it.

When your lawyer is on leave, the matter is taken over by someone with access to your files, so the work does not stall. We keep all arrangements and letters in one place, so continuity is preserved regardless of absences. On request we name the lawyer leading your work and set out their experience in your industry.

Yes — at the outset we agree a defined response time and write it into the contract, so you do not rely on goodwill. We aim to resolve simple questions within one business day, and urgent matters right away. We match the agreed service level (SLA) to the pace of your business and the type of matter.

For matters that require reviewing documents or drafting a letter, we set a realistic deadline and keep to it. If something is urgent — for example a demand with a short deadline — we treat it as a priority. We do not leave you without an answer because a lawyer is busy with another client, because the service is designed so that someone is always available.

In practice a short message or a call is usually enough — not every matter has to become a formal instruction. When you need a record in writing, we confirm short arrangements by email. That way day-to-day matters do not wait in a queue behind larger projects, and you know when you will get an answer.

Yes — debt recovery and court disputes are part of outsourcing, from a demand for payment through to representation in court. Ongoing support and litigation are one team here, so a matter does not fall out of your support when it goes to court — it is run by someone who already knows its background and documents.

We usually start at the pre-litigation stage: demands, negotiations and settlement, because that often suffices and is cheaper. If it does not work, we take the matter further. Because we know your contracts and correspondence, we run the dispute faster than an outside firm that must first learn the case.

Litigation and larger disputes are usually billed separately from the fixed fee — we flag this in advance and give a cost estimate and a realistic view of the chances. We are honest about the risk of a case before it starts, so you can make a business decision, not just a legal one.

Yes — keeping on top of compliance duties is one of the main reasons companies choose outsourcing: it is hard for one person to keep pace with every change at once. We help with GDPR (data-processing agreements, information duties, incidents), with KSeF readiness, with implementing whistleblowing procedures, with the duties arising from the AI Act, and with the newer cybersecurity requirements (NIS2/KSC, DORA) and sustainability reporting (ESG/CSRD).

E-invoicing in the National e-Invoicing System (KSeF) is being phased in: from 1 February 2026 for the largest companies, from 1 April 2026 for the rest, and for the smallest taxpayers (up to PLN 10,000 of sales per month) from 1 January 2027; the monetary penalties for errors within KSeF itself are suspended until the end of 2026. The duty to implement an internal reporting procedure applies to entities for which at least 50 people perform work — and in some sectors (among others finance and anti-money-laundering) it applies regardless of that number.

Duties under the AI Act depend on the role in which you use artificial-intelligence systems and the risk they carry — it looks different for a provider than for an entity that merely deploys them. We do not leave you with a bare statement that this is what the rule says: we help implement the specific documents and procedures so the duty is genuinely met, not just ticked off on paper.

Yes — you can change the scope and billing model at any time as your needs change. If there are more matters in a given period we scale the package up; if fewer, we scale it down. We do not tie you into a rigid contract that stops making sense after six months.

The cooperation can also be ended on agreed notice terms. We care about making the exit as orderly as the entry: we hand over the full set of documents, the matter register and the status of every pending matter, so that another firm or your in-house lawyer can take them on without chaos.

Changing the scope does not require renegotiating the whole contract — a short adjustment is enough. It is best to review the current model once a quarter, so it keeps pace with the company. If an unusual one-off matter comes up in between, we bill it separately without changing the whole fixed fee. The point is for legal support to fit the business, not the other way round.

Legal outsourcing is for companies that have regular legal matters but do not want — or cannot justify the cost of — maintaining their own legal department. Most often these are small and medium-sized companies and businesses in a phase of rapid growth, where law shows up in daily operations: in contracts, employment matters, payments and compliance.

It also works for companies with variable demand (projects, seasonality), for foreign entities entering the Polish market that need a local legal base, and where an in-house lawyer needs support at peak times or in narrow fields. Industry does not matter here — we support trade, services, manufacturing, e-commerce and regulated entities.

If you keep thinking that you should ask a lawyer but have no one to ask, or the cost of a hire seems out of proportion to your needs, that is the moment for outsourcing. You can read more about support for smaller companies on our page for small and medium-sized companies, and about everyday support in the description of ongoing legal advisory.