This is not legal advice. The scan result is information about the content of a public register kept by the President of UOKiK and about the wording of the Civil Code — an automated comparison of your contract against those sources. Only a court can decide whether a specific term is abusive, examining the circumstances of the given contract. Consult a lawyer before making decisions.
Paste the contract or terms (200 to 30,000 characters). Got a file or a paper contract? Switch to "Upload a file".
0 / 30,000
Have the contract as a PDF or on paper? Switch to "Upload a file (PDF / photos)" above.
Privacy. The contract text or file is processed solely for this one analysis — it goes to the AI model (Anthropic) and comes back as a report. We do not store contract text or files on our servers, in logs or in any database.
Copy the contract text and paste it into the field above — or upload a PDF, or photograph a paper contract page by page (up to 4 photos). Pick the contract type — the scanner will use the register entries relevant to that sector.
The AI splits the contract into clauses and compares them against the art. 385³ Civil Code catalog and the verified entries in the register of prohibited clauses.
You get a report: green for typical terms, yellow for questionable ones, and red — with a specific statutory point or a UOKiK register entry number.
The register of standard-contract terms deemed prohibited is kept by the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK). It collected clauses which the Court of Competition and Consumer Protection had finally ruled abusive in consumer contracts — each under its own entry number, with the trader and the case reference.
Since 17 April 2016 abusiveness of standard terms is decided by the President of UOKiK in administrative decisions, so no new entries are added — but the existing entries remain in the register and still show which contractual devices courts found abusive. The register is public and available at rejestr.uokik.gov.pl.
The scanner cites an entry number only when a contract term is convergent with one of the 47 entries we verified at the source. If there is no match, the scanner relies solely on the Civil Code provisions — it never invents entry numbers.
Under art. 385¹ § 1 of the Civil Code, a term of a consumer contract which was not individually negotiated does not bind the consumer if it shapes their rights and obligations contrary to good practice, grossly infringing their interests. This does not apply to terms defining the parties' principal performances — including price or remuneration — if worded unambiguously.
Art. 385² requires the assessment of a term's conformity with good practice to be made as at the moment the contract was concluded, taking into account its content, the circumstances of conclusion and related contracts.
Art. 385³ contains a catalog of twenty-three terms which, in case of doubt, are deemed prohibited — from excluding liability for personal injury, through unilateral amendment of the contract without a valid reason, to imposing a court which is not the statutory venue. Full wording of the catalog: art. 385³ KC.
An abusive term does not bind the consumer by operation of law — but in practice you have to assert this effectively. Three sensible steps:
The consumer ombudsman (rzecznik konsumentów) will help you assess the contract free of charge and prepare a letter to the trader — for example a demand to stop using the term, or a complaint. You will find them at your city or district office.
If a trader uses abusive terms in standard contracts, you can notify the President of UOKiK, who may open proceedings to declare the standard terms prohibited.
An attorney-at-law will assess your specific situation, help you invoke the ineffectiveness of the clause and handle a potential dispute with the trader.
Looking for a specialist? Browse verified profiles in the directory: attorneys-at-law on Prawnet.
No. The scanner informs you that a term matches a point of the art. 385³ Civil Code catalog or is convergent with an entry in the UOKiK register of prohibited clauses. An abusive term does not bind the consumer, but the contract as a rule remains in force otherwise, and the final assessment of abusiveness belongs to a court.
No. The contract text or file is processed only in memory for the duration of one analysis — it goes to the AI model and comes back as a report. We do not save it to a database, logs or anywhere else.
From a manually verified, curated list of entries in the register of prohibited clauses — every number is confirmed by a public source. If a term does not match any verified entry, the scanner relies solely on the Civil Code provisions.
Since 17 April 2016 new cases end in decisions of the President of UOKiK, so the register no longer grows — but the entries collected in it remain public and still show which contractual devices courts found abusive. UOKiK decisions are published separately on the office's website.
The scanner is free. Because of analysis costs there is a limit of 3 scans per day per user and a daily global limit for the whole service — whether you paste text or upload a file. One analysis covers up to 30,000 characters of text, or one PDF up to 10 MB, or up to 4 photos — split a longer contract into parts.