As a party to arbitration proceedings, it is crucial that your case is judged by appropriate arbitrator(s). Consequently, it is essential to know how and under what procedure the arbitrator(s) can be appointed and how the arbitral tribunal is formed in Hungary. In our short article, we present the most basic rules regarding the arbitrators and the formation of the arbitral tribunal in Hungary.
The "ne bis in idem" principle has its roots in criminal law, to avoid prosecuting someone twice for the same criminal conduct. Can the principle be applied in Hungary when consumer protection and competition authorities impose administrative sanctions against the same person? In a recent case, the Hungarian Supreme Court decided this question.
If you intend to pursue a claim against a Hungarian debtor, based on the contract on which a dispute is based, you may need to bring a case before an ordinary Hungarian court or to initiate Hungarian arbitration proceedings. In this short article we summarise the 5 key differences between the two procedures.
A potential plaintiff, who intends to initiate a civil law litigation against his debtor in Hungary, often aims to enforce the Hungarian judgment only in Hungary. However, a Hungarian judgment may be enforced also in other EU or EEA Member States without any intermediary procedure ('exequatur'). Moreover, a Hungarian Judgment may be also enforced in a third country which recognises the Hungarian Judgment.
The passing of time makes claims unenforceable in front of courts. While in some countries, a simple notice letter interrupts the limitation period, in Hungary creditors who want to avoid the limitation of their claim must initiate a lawsuit. Is it always enough to start litigation to interrupt the limitation of claims in Hungary? The Hungarian Supreme Court addressed this question in a recent case.
In Hungarian civil and commercial litigations, the second instance court reviews the case in camera, yet either party has the right to request an oral hearing in the appeal procedure. Is the second instance court bound by such a request? Is the failure to hold an oral hearing considered as a serious breach, based on which new procedure shall be conducted? We answer these questions by analysing recent decision of the Hungarian Supreme Court in this article.
When a plaintiff decides to litigate only part of his claim, the question arises whether the ‘res judicata’ effect of the final judgment precludes a new lawsuit for the unclaimed part of the claim? The Hungarian Supreme Court’s recently issued a uniformity decision on this question. What will be the impact of this ruling? We address the question by analysing the uniformity decision
When it comes to litigating in Hungary, foreign parties often only take into account the court duties and attorney's fees as costs. However, in addition to these, there may be additional expenses that may come as a surprise. In order to avoid this, in our short article, we will summarise the costs of litigating in Hungary.
Foreign creditors often come to us with saying that they have a debtor in Hungary, or that the debtor has assets in Hungary and intends to initiate legal proceedings against it. When analysing the initiation of a civil action, the question often arises whether the debtor can be sued in Hungary?
While the reviewing of questions of law by higher courts is generally permitted at the judicial remedy stages of civil litigation in Hungary, questions of fact, and the free deliberation of evidence, can only be reviewed exceptionally by the Hungarian Supreme Court under well settled case law. Is this rule also applicable under the new Civil Procedure Code? This article answers this question by analysing the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in a case concerning the impacts of covid-19 on the Hungarian phase of the Giro d'Italia cycling race.
The assignment of claims is a common practice in business, yet under Hungarian law, it has not been made clear what rights are transferred to the new owner of the claim, and what claims can be litigated by the assignee. It is also unclear whether the assignor and assignee can determine the extent of the rights transferred by assignment. Due to a recent decision of the Hungarian Supreme Court, analysed in this article, this situation has become clearer.
One of the major innovations of the new Civil Procedure Code ("CPC"), which entered into force in 2018, was the introduction of the so-called "substantive legal guidance by the court", under which the judge may "assist" the parties under certain conditions to define the framework of the dispute as soon as possible and to bring the dispute to a conclusion within a reasonable time. Can the judicial assistance extend to the type of action that the plaintiff may bring? We examine the above question in the light of a recent decision of the Curia.
In its recent decision, the Hungarian Supreme Court examined whether liquidation proceedings can be started against a debtor who received online invoices via email and failed to pay them. Is the principle of free evaluation of evidence in civil litigation also valid in insolvency proceedings in Hungary? Are contract provisions relating to the service of contractual notices applicable in such cases? This article analyses the decision and answers the above questions