The amendment to the Act on the Protection and Care of Historic Monuments forms part of the so-called deregulation package, a widely publicised legislative initiative aimed at reducing bureaucracy. To a large extent, it introduces a change in regulatory standards by simplifying procedures and making it easier for individuals and businesses to undertake certain activities without obtaining formal authorisations from public authorities, or with fewer such authorisations being required. Investors should therefore take note of potentially significant legal changes intended to streamline investment projects carried out in areas subject to heritage protection.

Works in the vicinity of a historic monument – potential difficulties for investors

Undertaking any project that interferes with the condition of real property, not only with the fabric of a building itself, in the vicinity of a historic monument, or even more so within the monument itself, may present particular difficulties for an investor. Such projects are generally associated with the need to navigate procedures commonly regarded as highly bureaucratic.

As a general rule under the Act of 23 July 2003 on the Protection and Care of Historic Monuments, a permit from the Provincial Conservator of Monuments is required to carry out conservation or restoration work, or construction works, in relation to a historic monument entered in the register of monuments. This includes works involving the removal of a tree or shrub from real property, or a part thereof, entered in the register as a park, garden or another form of designed greenery. This requirement arises, among other provisions, from Article 36(1) of the Act.

The same type of permit is also required to remove a tree or shrub from real property, or a part thereof, entered in the register as a park, garden or another form of designed greenery, where the removal is carried out for reasons other than conservation or restoration work.

At the same time, under another piece of legislation, namely the Act of 16 April 2004 on Nature Conservation, a tree or shrub may generally be removed from real property, or a part thereof, only after an authorisation has been obtained upon application.

Such authorisation is issued by the head of a municipality, the mayor or the president of a city. However, where the application concerns the removal of a tree or shrub from real property, or a part thereof, entered in the register of monuments, the competent authority is the Provincial Conservator of Monuments. This follows from Article 83a(1) of the Act.

Consequently, interference with trees or shrubs located around or within a historic monument has, as a rule, required two separate administrative proceedings to be conducted under the respective regimes of the two Acts referred to above.

Many lawyers and representatives of the real estate sector consider this procedure to be disproportionate, as it effectively duplicates the proceedings despite the fact that the same Provincial Conservator of Monuments is the competent authority in both cases.

The explanatory memorandum to the draft amendment itself described this situation as the “concurrent application” of two different legislative acts[1]. The rules should have been changed long ago. Fortunately, partly as a result of public pressure, the legislature has finally recognised the problem and taken action.

Deregulation – what is changing?

The existing rules are amended by the Act of 9 October 2025 amending the Act on the Protection and Care of Historic Monuments and certain other acts (Journal of Laws of 2025, item 1673). Most of its provisions entered into force on 6 June 2026, while Article 4 will enter into force on 1 January 2027.

First, the procedure requiring two separate decisions will be “deregulated”. These are the permit issued under the Act on the Protection and Care of Historic Monuments and the authorisation issued under the Act on Nature Conservation.

The legislature has decided to replace the two decisions previously issued by the Provincial Conservator of Monuments in relation to the removal of the same trees or shrubs from areas entered in the register of monuments, including parks, gardens and other forms of designed greenery, with a single decision issued by that authority.

In addition, the amendment introduces the concept of tacit approval into the procedure for obtaining permits from the Provincial Conservator of Monuments in relation to the activities specified in Article 36(1)(2), (7) and (9)–(11) of the Act on the Protection and Care of Historic Monuments.

Under the new procedure, where an entity intending to undertake one of the activities specified in the Act submits the required notification and the Provincial Conservator of Monuments does not raise an objection within the statutory time limit, the relevant consent will be deemed to have been granted. The matter will therefore be regarded as having been resolved by means of tacit approval.

According to the authors of the draft legislation, simplifying the procedure for obtaining the approval of the Provincial Conservator of Monuments for the removal of trees or shrubs from parks, gardens and other forms of designed greenery entered in the register of monuments, as well as specifying the circumstances in which tacit approval may apply, will enable administrative decisions to be obtained more quickly, expedite document circulation and improve the efficiency of business operations.

Based on practical experience, particularly professional experience, the overall direction of the changes should be assessed positively. Deregulation of the provisions governing the protection of historic monuments is a natural step towards streamlining administrative proceedings and reducing bureaucracy, at least to some extent.

Irrespective of these legislative changes, whenever any work is to be carried out in relation to or within a historic monument, particularly construction work, or in an area subject to nature conservation requirements, it remains advisable to seek legal advice and representation from qualified lawyers.

Our law firm advises clients on complex investment projects in challenging locations, including areas subject to heritage protection and nature conservation legislation.

^[1] See p. 1 of the explanatory memorandum to the draft legislation: Parliamentary Paper No. 1445, Government Bill amending the Act on the Protection and Care of Historic Monuments and certain other acts.