(a) Duration of proceedings The following concentration measures should be emphasized: the collection of material rests with the first instance; the prohibition of renewal applies to the higher instances. The principle of oral presentation helps to streamline proceedings; in accordance with § 257 ZPO prepared written statements of the case are only permissible up to the start of the dispute proceedings. Hearings and deadlines must be stipulated ex officio. Although in accordance with § 179 ZPO the parties may submit new statements and pieces of evidence until the end of the oral proceedings, such behaviour may be declared improper if the new applications and pieces of evidence were obviously not offered earlier for the purpose of delaying the proceedings and if their admission would, in actual fact, essentially prolong the proceedings. Acceptance of evidence offered may, in accordance with § 275 ZPO, be refused upon request or ex officio, if the court gains the conviction that such evidence is only offered in order to prolong the proceedings. Where the acceptance of a piece of evidence meets with the obstacle of uncertain duration, the court must, upon request, fix a due date after the expiry of which the proceedings are continued irrespective of any evidence not yet furnished. If statements or evidence are furnished out of time, the court may, upon request or ex officio, charge the party concerned, also if the party wins the case, with the indemnification in part or in full of the costs of the proceedings (cost fine) in accordance with § 44 ZPO, or charge it for the costs incurred (cost separation) in accordance with § 48 ZPO. The party having caused a delayed due date or a prolonged hearing must be charged with the costs incurred therefor in accordance with § 142 ZPO. The last case on IPR in Liechtenstein courts was commenced in spring 1995; the first instance sentence rendered in summer 1995, the second instance sentence in December 1995. Actually the case is pending in the third instance. (b) Costs Costs depend on the value in cause. There is a separation between the lawyer's tariff and the court fees. Both are regulated in acts and ordinances respectively. The costs of a proceeding comprise the court fees (including also other costs incurred) and all other costs (in particular the representation costs of the lawyer). The fee to be paid to the state for the execution of the proceedings depends on the value in dispute. It is a lump sum per instance appealed to for the decision and a fee for the protocol depending on the duration of the proceedings, in particular the number and duration of court hearings. To this must be added possibly further costs (in particular the costs incurred for experts and fees paid to witnesses), the amount of which cannot even be approximated in view of the different circumstances encountered in each procedure. The costs of the lawyer are calculated according to a system of rates graded on the basis of the value in dispute. Quota-litis agreements are not permitted. If, in the context of the above-mentioned proceedings, the value in dispute cannot be marked with figures, it usually amounts to SwF. 100,000 as fixed by an ordinance of the Chamber of Attorneys. Due to the lack of respective international agreements, except with Austria and Switzerland, a foreign party usually will be liable to give security for the costs of the proceeding and the attorney.