Search

Search Results

• Rethinking principles of civil procedure - expectations and experiences:

  118-127.

  Tamás dr. Molnár

  Views:

  218

  The central topic of the present study is certain features of the principles re-regulated during the codification of the Hungarian Code of Civil Procedure. It can be said that the number and content of the principles have also become more concentrated as a result of codification.

  The Act CXXX of 2016 on the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter “CPC”) brought a number of conceptual changes, which can also be observed in terms of principles. The principles chapter of the CPC has been renewed, some principles that are not yet known in Hungarian civil procedure law have been laid down. The present study reviews these changes and also seeks to take a position on the content of the principles, with a separate examination of the Principle of Concentration of Proceedings, which has also been identified as a priority objective by the legislator.

  The paper analyzes the academic debates on the principles and attempts to answer whether the experience of the period since its entry into force has met some of the expectations for the reform of the principles. The study examines the changed regulations that have led to opposing views in the literature.

  An important topic of the study is that, in line with the divided structure of the proceeding, the court's intervention activities have also changed. This change can also be observed in the principles, as the Principle of Court's Obligation to Intervene has emerged as a new principle. Some features of the Principle of Truth-telling and Principle of Good Faith are also analyzed.

  The study seeks to shed light on the fundamental issues of civil procedure through foreign examples, in which certain elements of German legislation are mainly mentioned.

• What are the limits? - Thoughts about Certain Issues of the Active Judicial Role

  61-73.

  Attila Dr. Kiss

  Views:

  207

  The Act CXXX of 2016 on the Code of Civil Procedure introduced the image of the managerial judge into the Hungarian civil litigation. This perception means that the judge has to take part actively in the litigation. It is not just the notion of the Hungarian legislator but it is also an international requirement. The new principle – so called court inducements – entitles and obligates the judge to offer some kind of support to the parties in order to faciliate to concentrate the actions. That means the judge has to conduct substantively the proceedings, which may expand on the merits, if the party’s case initiation statement is incomplete, not sufficiently detailed or contradictory. However, this support is not equal to giving advices like a legal counsel does. The judge can not overtake the function and task of neither the party nor the legal counsel. The judicial activitiy is meant to provide the party’s opportunity to enforce his claims and a proper level of legal protection. This image of an active and managerial judge originates from the Austrian social model of litigation which goes back to 1895. But it is also not unfamiliar to the Hungarian litigation because the Act I of 1911 on the Civil Procedure was based on an active role of the judge too. My goal is to ascertain what the essence and function of the active role of the judge is. I also examine that in what kind of situations and in what procedural phases the judge can offer support to the parties. Furthermore I intend to define the limits of the judicial management. In addition, I analyse how some interpretative organisations view the issues that appeared in the judicial practice.