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
Can a judge be disqualified from deciding a legal dispute on the grounds of bias if they have delivered a judgment which is unfavourable to the plaintiff in another case? Can a court be biased if a plaintiff has challenged a previous decision thereof before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)? This article answers these questions by analysing a recent Supreme Court judgment
Is a penalty for delayed performance enforceable if the purchaser fails to reserve its rights immediately? Or is enforceability excluded only if the purchaser expressly waives its right? This article analyses the Supreme Court's judgment in a recent construction dispute, in which the court appears to have maintained its estoppel-based practice despite recent legislative changes.
The case law of Hungarian construction disputes in the last years sheds light on the intention of courts to protect the “weaker party”. The Supreme Court has already started to protect subcontractors by declaring certain contract terms invalid, and its recent decision even places more risks at general contractors. How to cope with these challenges in Hungary? We address this question in our article.