The only thing more annoying than an award-debtor concealing their assets after successful arbitral proceedings is an award-debtor trying to further frustrate the award-enforcement by concluding a choice-of-court agreement. But does this kind of jurisdiction clause extend to the non-signatory award-creditor? This article analyses the recent decision of a Hungarian appellate court, delivered under the EU Brussels Ibis Regulation,(1) in which the court had to rule on the personal scope of a jurisdiction clause.
Business life involves a variety of contracts that are not regulated by the civil codes in continental jurisdictions. In cases where the parties conclude a so-called "atypical contract", it is for the judge to decide whether the default rules of a nominated contract regulated by the Civil Code can be applied in a gap-filling function. The recent decision of a Hungarian appellate court, which was also published in the Hungarian Collection of Court Decisions, analysed whether a workforce supplier could invoke the rules applicable to agency contracts to support their damage claim under Hungarian law.
In the recent past, the Court of Justice of the European Union had to deal with the question whether an accommodation operator registered to Booking.com can sue the latter because of abuse of dominant position. In this short article we analyse the background of the case and the decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Can parties' conduct during litigation amount to an implied choice-of-law agreement based on EU Regulation 593/2008 (Rome I Regulation)? This article analyses a recent Supreme Court judgment concerning this question.(1)
In the emergency situation due to COVID-19 the rules of the civil litigation were modified: the most important change was that courts did not held court hearings at all or only through electronic telecommunication channels. Because of the moderation of the epidemic, from 1st June 2020 the civil litigations can return to “normality” with a few slight changes. In our short article we summarize the new rules.
The coronavirus and the state of emergency ordered by the Hungarian government to fight this epidemic affects every part of our life. Civil and business litigations are not exceptions either. In our short article we summarize what are the most relevant changes in the ongoing and envisaged court procedures in Hungary.
The European Court of Human Rights usually condemns Hungary because of too slow legal proceedings, breaching the fair trial principle as human right. However, the latest judgment of the Court, condemning Hungary was delivered because of a too fast judicial decision.
On 1st January 2018 a new Civil Procedure Code enters into force in Hungary with the principal aim to speed up civil & business litigations, through divided litigation structure and important restrictions for the litigants. In this short article we collected the 5 most important changes which will affect you if you start a litigation in Hungary from 2018.