The dynamic growth of Chinese automotive brands in the Polish new vehicle market introduces a new risk factor into the vehicle claims process: a systemic, rather than merely incidental, increase in waiting times for spare parts. While the European market has had a well-established distribution network for components for Western brands for decades, new players generally have less developed regional logistics, necessitating the import of key components, especially bodywork and specialized electronics, directly from Asia.
The specific nature of logistics thus shaped raises questions as to whether the current case law regarding compensation for the rental of a replacement vehicle will remain fully adequate to the new market reality.
Well-established legal standard
The basis for an insurance company's liability for the costs of renting a replacement vehicle remains Article 361 § 2 of the Civil Code, which expresses the principle of full compensation for damages. Established Supreme Court case law clearly defines the limits of this liability, indicating, above all, that compensation covers intentional and economically justified expenses incurred for renting a replacement vehicle, calculated for the actual, not the technological, repair time. This means that the reimbursed rental period must include all objectively necessary activities that constitute the full repair and disposal process, including the waiting time at the repair shop, the waiting time for inspection, and, crucially in this context, the time required to import spare parts. The insurer's liability also covers expenses exceeding the costs of the rental offer proposed by the insurer, provided that such expenses were intentional and economically justified, as confirmed by the Supreme Court resolution of August 24, 2017, III CZP 20/17.
In the light of this standard, delays resulting from the need to import spare parts, regardless of their geographical origin, constitute an integral element of the actual repair time and, as a rule, are borne by the insurer responsible for the third-party liability insurance of the perpetrator of the damage, not the injured party.
Expected contentious lines
The specific nature of the Chinese vehicle parts market, the availability of which can be a significant limitation in the supply chain, is likely to give rise to disputes in the coming years, focusing on two main issues.
The first is to draw a line between waiting times resulting from objective market conditions, such as a lack of regional warehouses within the European Union, and those resulting from errors or negligence by the repair shop itself, for example, placing an order too late or failing to select an available replacement of comparable quality. If the extended waiting time results from the objective unavailability of a component on the European market, then, in light of current case law, this risk should be borne by the insurer. Limiting this liability is only justified if the injured party or the repair shop failed to meet their obligation to minimize the damage, for example, by choosing the longest available route to obtain the part without technical justification, despite the existence of a faster alternative of equivalent quality.
The second issue is the potential shift in the classification of a loss toward total loss. An extended waiting period, sometimes several months, for the import of a costly bodywork or electronic part can significantly increase the total, economically calculated cost of repair, rendering it unprofitable within the meaning of existing case law. As a result, a vehicle that, from a purely technical perspective, would be repairable may be classified as a total loss, automatically shortening the reasonable rental period for a replacement vehicle to the time necessary to purchase a replacement vehicle, but no longer than the date of compensation payment. An increase in such cases, especially given the rising costs of parts, is highly probable in the coming years.
Practical conclusions and forecasts
The increase in claims involving Chinese-brand vehicles should not change the fundamental legal principles governing liability for the costs of renting a replacement vehicle, but it will significantly increase the burden of proof on both parties to claims proceedings. From the perspective of injured parties and their representatives, meticulous documentation of the repair process will be crucial, with particular emphasis on the exact dates of parts orders, confirmation of their objective unavailability on the European market at a given time, and the technical justification for the impossibility of using substitutes. From the perspective of insurance companies, however, attempts to automatically limit rental reimbursement to the theoretical, technological repair time calculated using cost estimation software will continue to be ineffective in court proceedings. Insurers will therefore be forced to develop new settlement standards that take into account the realistically extended repair time for Chinese-brand vehicles, provided the injured party can demonstrate that the waiting time for the part was objectively necessary and had a normal causal relationship with the vehicle damage.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
The law is current as of May 27, 2026.
Author / Editor of the series:
