Before the Katowice-West District Court in Katowice, we have once again won a dispute with the National Health Fund. The Court confirmed that due to a legal loophole in the Official Register of Medicinal Products, the National Health Fund has no grounds to impose penalties and demand the refund of reimbursement for the dispensing of products containing very potent substances by pharmacy technicians.
SR Katowice-Zachód: „there is no ban on the dispensing of medicinal products containing very potent substances by pharmacy technicians”
On 9 July 2026, our Law Firm achieved yet another success, winning a dispute against the National Health Fund before the Katowice-Zachód District Court in Katowice. The core of the dispute – once again – concerned the scope of powers of pharmacy technicians regarding the dispensing of medicinal products containing very potent substances. The National Health Fund maintained that a technician may not dispense the aforementioned medicines, but the Court agreed with the arguments presented by us.
Legal dispute – interpretation of Article 91(1)(1) of the Pharmaceutical Law
The dispute in question was essentially a legal dispute - since both our clients as
and the NHF tried to present their own interpretation of the provision defining the entitlements of pharmacy technicians, while not challenging the very fact that potent medicinal products had been dispensed by the aforementioned persons.
As provided in Article 91(1)(1) of the Pharmaceutical Law:
1. A pharmacy technician with two years of full-time practical experience in a pharmacy may perform professional activities in a pharmacy consisting in the preparation, manufacture, and dispensing of medicinal products and medical devices, with the exception of medicinal products containing in their composition:
1) very potent substances specified in the Official Register of Medicinal Products Authorised for Marketing in the Territory of the Republic of Poland,
2) intoxicating substances,
3) psychotropic substances of groups I-P and II-P
– as specified in separate provisions.”.
What, in the Court's opinion, tipped the balance in favour of our clients' victory?
The District Court in Katowice fully shared our position, pointing out directly in the oral grounds for the decision that imposing the obligation to return the reimbursement (pursuant to Article 43(1)(6) of the Reimbursement Act) and imposing a contractual penalty for the dispensing of medicinal products containing very potent substances by pharmacy technicians it was not justified.
As the Court pointed out, a technician indeed cannot dispense medicines containing very potent substances – but only those specified in the Official Register of Medicinal Products Authorised for Trading within the Territory of the Republic of Poland.
During the period in which the medicinal products were dispensed on the basis of the prescriptions questioned by the National Health Fund (NFZ), the aforementioned list did not specify medicinal products classified as products containing very potent substances, nor did it even contain any list of substances recognised as very potent.
Importantly, such a claim can also be applied to the current legal status and the content of the Pharmaceutical Law, as this register still does not contain any column or list that would explicitly indicate which medicinal products authorised for marketing in the territory of the Republic of Poland contain very potent substances.
Existing legal loophole
Despite the formal validity of Article 91(1)(1) of the Pharmaceutical Law, the aforementioned content deficiencies in the Official Register of Medicinal Products result in the existence – in the Court's opinion – of a legal loophole. This is because the provision in question cannot function properly, as the Official Register of Medicinal Products lacks an indication or determination as to which of the medicinal products listed therein contain very potent substances.
Thus, the Court held that at present at the statutory level, there is no ban on pharmacy technicians dispensing medicinal products containing very potent substancesTherefore, it was also considered that a state legal person cannot enforce a ban which the state – in the person of the legislator – essentially did not specify, referring to a document which does not allow the individual to reconstruct a prohibition of a given content.
What significance does the discussed ruling hold for pharmacies?
It is no secret that the National Health Fund routinely imposes obligations on pharmacies to refund reimbursements and contractual penalties for alleged violations of Article 91(1)(1) of the Pharmaceutical Law. The above ruling shows that this type of action by the Fund very frequently has no legal basis, and the court has once again confirmed our assessment – the current legal status does not contain a prohibition on the dispensing of very potent medicinal products by pharmacy technicians.
Once again, we thank our clients for their trust and collaborative efforts towards achieving positive results. Our Law Firm has extensive experience in representing pharmacies and pharmaceutical market entities in disputes regarding the return of reimbursement..
Get in touch with us if you think we can help you.