Legislation works are carried out to change the Civil Procedure Code (Government’s Bill VIII, item.3137) with an aim to put in place a comprehensive reform that will simplify and speed up court proceedings in civil matters.
In this newsletter, we present the first bit of information regarding the key draft changes in the civil procedure, including:
The bill introduces a general clause on abuse of procedural law which provides that the parties and participants to the proceedings will not be allowed to exercise the rights provided for in the civil procedure rules contrary to the purpose for which these rules were introduced. When court finds that procedural law has been abused by a party subject to procedural law – such as wilful intent to lengthen the procedure – it may order that party to pay a fine, award against it costs of proceedings regardless of the ruling, award costs of proceedings even twice higher or maximize interest on the awarded consideration adequately to a delay in hearing the case caused by the abuse up to twice a maximum interest for length of delay.
The rules on court territorial competence are to be changed with an aim to counterbalance the workload of “metropolitan” and “provincial” courts, according to the bill’s grounds. To this end, the bill provides for an exemption of provisions on alternative jurisdiction in cases against consumers and limitation of instances in which alternative jurisdiction will be allowed in cases involving contractual claims. Claims against an autonomous possessor, as long as they concern real property, will be resolved by court competent for the location of real property.
The plans are to transpose this judicial device known from criminal law into the civil procedure in a slightly changed form. The Supreme Court will be able to remit the case for re-examination to another court if so required by the interest of justice, in particular out of consideration for social apprehension of court as an independent authority. The competent court will be able to apply for such remittance.
In some cases in which currently judges may not act by virtue of the law, there will be a possibility to appoint another court to hear the case. The court in which the judge or judges may not hear the case due to the circumstances provided by law will be able to apply for remittance of the case to another court . The purpose of this amendment, according to the grounds of the bill, is to eliminate an influence of any personal dependency (social or colleague-to-colleague) between the judge dealing with the case and other judges from the same court over the verdict.
In accordance with the bill, a defendant will be obliged to file a reply to the statement of claim within a period not shorter than two weeks. This will help the court to familiarize with argumentations of both parties to enable amicable resolution of the case during pre-trial proceedings.
We’ll get back to you with an update on further amendments in the next newsletter.
View the second part of the newsletter: Planned amendments to civil procedure
TGC Corporate Lawyers
Litigation and arbitration – see how we can help: