Examen de la législation d'application de l'Accord sur les ADPIC ‒ Recherche

Réinitialiser
 
 

Aux termes de l'article 63:2 de l'Accord sur les ADPIC, les Membres doivent notifier les lois et réglementations qu'ils auront rendues exécutoires, et qui visent les questions faisant l'objet de l'Accord, au Conseil des ADPIC pour l'aider dans son examen du fonctionnement de l'Accord.

Cette page vous permet d'effectuer une recherche dans les questions et réponses des Membres au sujet des lois et réglementations notifiées. Vous pouvez consulter les résultats de la recherche à l'écran ou les télécharger afin de les imprimer au format Excel. Vous pouvez également télécharger des documents spécifiques.

* Vous n'êtes PAS obligé(e) de sélectionner tous les champs de recherche ci-dessous (uniquement les champs qui sont pertinents pour votre recherche).
* Veuillez noter que les critères de recherche sélectionnés sont cumulatifs et figureront tous dans les résultats de votre recherche.


Page 13 de 677   |   Nombre de documents : 13533

Cote du document Membre notifiant Membre soulevant la question Question Réponse Date de distribution du document  
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Japon 16. Please explain who shall pay the cost of detentions based on Article 51 of the TRIPS Agreement or destruction stipulated in Article 59 of the TRIPS Agreement.
The court, judging the merits of the case, decides who shall pay the cost of detentions. The cost of destruction is borne by the infringer, but may also be borne by the authority executing the destruction, depending on the case.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Japon 17. Please explain what kind of cases are regarded as "the exceptional circumstances" in which the competent authorities may allow re exportation of counterfeit trademark goods stipulated in Article 59 of the TRIPS Agreement.
No judicial practice exists in this regard.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Japon 18. Please explain whether the amount of damages which judicial authorities order the person who infringes intellectual property rights to pay the right holder is adequate compensation for the injury the right holder has suffered, and what criteria and the way for calculation to decide the amount for compensation.
The amount of damages is adequate compensation. Criteria of the way for calculation are followed under general rules set out in Slovenia's response to question 5 of the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Japon [Follow-up question from Japan] With respect to Slovenia's response to question 18 from Japan regarding damages for the infringement of intellectual property rights, please describe the way for calculation of "recovery of profits" in Slovenia's response to question 5 of the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement. And, please explain whether or not "recovery of profits" includes the intellectual property right holder's lost profits, infringer's profits from the unlawful utilization of the intellectual property right or reasonable royalty for utilization of the intellectual property right.
For the calculation of the recovery of lost profits all the possibilities mentioned in the question are applicable. The calculation can be based therefore either on the right holder's lost profits, on the infringer's gained profits, or on the reasonable royalty under licence analogy. Which way will be chosen depends upon the plaintiff's claim(s) and his factual allegations, based on the submitted evidence.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Suisse 1. Please explain whether international treaties which contain detailed provisions addressed to the (judicial) authorities and not to the State itself are considered as self-executing in your system? If not, when there is a divergence between the intellectual property legislation/practices and the international agreement in your country, does the latter automatically prevail? If not, please explain the means allowing your country to fulfill the international obligations? Please cite the relevant texts or jurisprudence.
International treaties which were ratified and officially published under Article 8 of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia are applicable directly and thus self-executing. This means that in Slovenia also the TRIPS Agreement is in principle applicable directly, provided that the relevant provision allows direct applicability, i.e. it has to be clear and complete. Current practice of the courts is in favour of direct applicability, as for example in the case of Article 50 of the TRIPS Agreement. There are two judgements related to patent cases, of the Court of Appeals in Ljubljana (Cgp 326/97 from 13 May 1997 and Cgp 552/97 from 12 June 1997), where the ruling was in favour of interlocutory injunctions under the conditions of Article 50.3 of the TRIPS Agreement. Therefore, there is in principle no divergence between the intellectual property legislation and practice, but if it appears, then international agreement prevails, as explicitly specified in the mentioned Article 8 of the Constitution.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Suisse 2. Article 55 of the TRIPS Agreement provides that "… in appropriate cases, this time-limit [of ten days] may be extended by another ten working days." Is such time extension foreseen in your laws? If yes, please cite the relevant provisions. If not please explain how an applicant can avail himself of this possibility as provided by the TRIPS Agreement?
The time extension of another ten working days pursuant to Article 55 of the TRIPS Agreement is not explicitly mentioned in the relevant legislation. However, since the TRIPS Agreement is directly applicable (see the answer to question 1 from Switzerland above), an applicant can make use of the extended term by directly referring to the mentioned provision of the TRIPS Agreement, which may be considered to be self-executing.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Union européenne 1. What is the typical length of time necessary to enforce the respective intellectual property rights in Slovenia? Should delays occur, what are the reasons (Article 41.2 of the TRIPS Agreement)?
The typical length is around one to two years in the first instance, and up to an additional one year in case an appeal is lodged.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Union européenne 2. With regard to cases that involve the infringement of intellectual property, could the Government of Slovenia provide data on the number of: - law suits that have been filed including their respective outcome and the average length from the filing of a complaint until the final judgement; - injunctions that have been issued (as defined in Article 44 of the TRIPS Agreement) and explain how such injunctions are being enforced; - provisional measures (as defined in Article 50 of the TRIPS Agreement) that have been granted and the average length to obtain such measures (from the request); - suspensions at the border of counterfeit trademark/pirated copyright goods or in relation to goods where other intellectual property rights are infringed; - criminal cases including the sentences that have been applied; whether they have been executed; and please also explain what kind of infringement of an intellectual property right would be regarded as a violation of criminal law; - seizures and/or destruction of counterfeit trademark and pirated copyright goods.
It is difficult to give reliable statistical data on the number of various law suits because Slovenia is a relatively young State. The data available as of January 1996 onwards show that, taking into account all cases in the field of intellectual property, there are currently about 50 cases initiated each year. The average length of proceedings at the first instance (from filing the suit until the judgement) is between one and two years. In proceedings in complicated matters, especially in patent litigation with experts involved and counterclaims on revocation filed, the duration is sometimes longer. One has to add up to one additional year for ruling on an appeal against the first instance judgement. Provisional measures are ordered quickly; an interlocutory injunction in about a week. (Final) injunctions are sought in almost every infringement suit. They are enforced with fines that the court is empowered to impose under Article 225 of the Code of Execution. The other possibility is an application under Article 294 of the Code of Obligations. The court can order the party who does not obey the injunction to pay the other party a sum of money, high enough to ensure obedience (similar to French "l'astreinte"). Provisional measures are often sought and are granted in the majority of copyright cases. The success of such applications is also quite high in trademark cases, whereas in patent cases the number of granted provisional measures is lower. When an ex parte provisional measure is sought and ordered, this is done in about a week from the request. No suspension at the border of counterfeit trademark or pirated copyright goods has been requested so far. There have been around 15 criminal cases lodged. The kind of infringement which would be regarded as a violation of criminal law is specified in Slovenia's response to question 24 of the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Union européenne Furthermore, could the Government of Slovenia explain and give practical examples of: - how the compensation for damages of the infringement of intellectual property rights is calculated (Article 45.1 of the TRIPS Agreement); - what would be regarded as "expenses of the right holder" which have to be reimbursed pursuant to Article 45.2, first half of the first sentence, of the TRIPS Agreement and how they would be calculated; - whether attorney's fees can be reimbursed and how such fees would be calculated; - whether Article 45.2, second sentence, of the TRIPS Agreement has been implemented in Slovenia and how such "damages" would be calculated?
The compensation is normally calculated on the basis of licence analogy, and/or lost profit is added. In addition, the Copyright and Related Rights Act explicitly provides for punitive damages which are 200 per cent higher than ordinary damages. Court attorney fees are normally regarded as expenses of the right holder which have to be reimbursed.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Union européenne 3. Could the Government of Slovenia clarify whether a right holder has the possibility to apply for provisional measures with the judicial authorities and, if founded, could such measures be adopted inaudita altera parte?
The right holder has the possibility to apply for provisional measures (see Slovenia's responses to questions 10 and 11 of the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Union européenne 4. What border measures are in place or planned to comply with Slovenia's obligations under Articles 51 to 60 of the TRIPS Agreement?
For counterfeit trademark goods the TRIPS Agreement may be directly applicable. However, it is planned that the new Law on Industrial Property which may be adopted in 1998 will explicitly contain provisions which would comply with all requirements of this Part of the TRIPS Agreement. In the area of copyright, two types of border measures are available to the right holder (Article 173 of the Copyright and Related Rights Act): (1) That the right holder or his agent may inspect such goods; (2) That such goods could be seized, their release into free circulation be suspended, and the goods be detained awaiting final decision by the competent authority.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Union européenne 5. Please explain whether and, if so, how enforcement rules differ between copyright and industrial property? If so, what are the reasons? Are there any plans to harmonize enforcement provisions?
Please see the reply to question 4.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVN/1 Slovénie Union européenne [Follow-up question from the EC] Does the Government of Slovenia intend to amend its legislation to comply with Articles 51 to 60 of the TRIPS Agreement in the area of copyright? If so, what is the foreseen timing?
The information given in Slovenia's responses to the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement, as well as the answers to the questions posed to Slovenia by the European Communities and their Member States, the United States and Japan demonstrate the compliance of Slovenian legislation with provisions of Part III of the TRIPS Agreement. Moreover, the Copyright and Related Rights Act has several explicit provisions on enforcement, including border measures. However, in the course of updating the Law on Industrial Property, the Copyright and Related Rights Act will also be scrutinized and amendments might be proposed, in order to avoid possible discrepancies between the two Acts. If this should be the case, the amendments to the Copyright and Related Rights Act will be submitted to the Parliament within the same timeframe as the new Law on Industrial Property, i.e. in 1998.
01/03/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 1. Articles 41.1 and 42 of the TRIPS Agreement require that procedures be available for the effective enforcement of the intellectual property rights covered by the Agreement. Please describe the structure of the judicial and administrative procedures in the Slovak Republic in which parties can enforce their intellectual property rights, at local, provincial and national levels, indicating the jurisdiction of each type of court or administrative body and explaining the interrelationships, if any, of the various types of courts and administrative bodies. Cite the laws or other authorities establishing the structure, including each type of court and administrative body.
In the beginning it might be useful to mention that in the Slovak Republic the judicial system is composed of three levels – three instances. The first instance is represented by district courts courts of general jurisdiction. Then there is the second instance, consisting of county courts that function as appellate courts, and the last resort is represented by the supreme court, whose task is to reach decisions mainly in matters of extraordinary remedies. In some specified cases of commercial and criminal law, county courts act as first instance courts and the role of the appellate court is then passed to the supreme court. Slovak courts and judiciary are fully independent. This means that all the judges are bound only by their consciousness and valid law. The jurist opinion of courts of higher instance is obligatory to courts of lower instance only with respect to a particular case. Despite that, there exists predominantly an informal system of precedence which is customarily applied to all cases, granting that decisions of the supreme court (primarily those generalising and representative) are officially published and widely respected. In appellate proceedings (judicial reviews) the relevant court of higher instance is able either to modify or to confirm the sentence or, if the sentence is found inadequate, to suspend it altogether and remit the case to the respective court of lower instance. The regulations concerning civil procedures are provided for by the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure, Act No. 99/1963, Digest of Laws, in accordance with the wording of later regulations. Requirements that need to be complied with if a party intends to file an action are relatively simple. The party wishing to file an action has only to supply the following information in his or her formal written request: identification of the parties involved in the enforcement procedure to be initiated, the merits of the case, the evidence proposed and the proposal for the court regarding the desirable kind of decision it should reach. Pursuant to Section 80, letters b) and c) of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure, in filing a legal action the party is able to require the court to decide primarily whether the duty established by the law is complied with in a legal relationship or in any violation of the law. The court could also determine whether there is any legal relationship or right at all given that there is an urgent valuable interest concerning this question. A party to an enforcement proceeding is thus entitled to ask the court to reach a decision in any of the ways corresponding to all the relevant criteria cited. In practice this means that courts decide on matters of damage payments, of adequate compensation for a non proprietary injury, which may also come in the form of financial compensation. Courts are authorised to order or forbid certain actions. Courts also decide on the existence or non existence of a right or legal relationship, given that there is a valuable interest concerning such a decision. Representation of a party by his or her counsel is not mandatory in trial proceedings, and legal fees account for 4% of the recoverable debt, the maximum amount being set as Sk 100 000, in commercial cases as Sk 500 000. There are several situations in which county courts function as first instance courts, namely in the following cases: enforcement of tradename rights, trademark rights and label of origin rights, then in matters of legal relationship concerning competition protection, unfair competition, patent rights, protected layout-designs and industrial designs and topography of semiconductor products as a subject of trade. The same applies to relationships resulting from copyrights and related rights. In such cases the supreme court functions as an appellate court. Formal requirements necessary for appealing against a sentence are more or less identical with those of filing an action. The structure of courts and their interrelationships are established by the Act on Courts and Judiciary No. 335/1991, Digest of Laws, in accordance with the wording of later regulations. The jurisdiction of courts concerning cases and localities as well as functions is established by the already cited Slovak Code of Civil Procedure. In the field of patent protection, there is the central administrative authority the Slovak Industrial Property Office ("SIPO"), which keeps the registers of separate subjects of industrial property, makes decisions regarding the entry or the cancellation in the registers, the annulment of the patent in the registers, changes in registers and the relevant agenda. The decision of SIPO can be, after all proper remedies of administrative proceedings have been exhausted, submitted to a court, if there is a formal request, and the court will review the decision’s legality. Decisions of SIPO can be reviewed by the supreme court. Aside from all the standard procedures of legal proceedings, in enforcement of rights, if there is a case of emergency, a request can be applied to obtain preliminary measures, pursuant to Section 74 and the following provisions of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure. Pursuant to Section 76, paragraph 1, letters d), e) and f), through preliminary measures the court is authorised primarily to order a party to pay a security or to deposit an object in court, to do something, to abstain from something, or to bear something, or the court is able to forbid a party to use certain things or rights. Preliminary measures represent from a procedural point of view a considerably simplified and rapid action, allowing the court to omit hearing the parties in person, but on the other hand binding it to reach a decision within the set period of one month, starting from the day the respective action has been filed. Preliminary measures can be enforced immediately, regardless of any contingent appeal against them, however, their effect is limited temporarily and also by their content, since they should not substitute a proper decision on the merits of the case and their effect is in principle bound to filing a proper legal action subsequently, within a proper time period determined by the court. As soon as a proper decision on the merits of the case is reached, the effect of the preliminary measures ceases by law. Otherwise it can cease when the time period determined by the court is over, or if the party does not comply with his or her obligation and fails to file a proper legal action regarding the case.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 2. Please describe briefly the procedure that must be followed by a foreign party to initiate an enforcement procedure in each of the courts and administrative bodies identified in response to question 1 and cite the legal authorities establishing those procedures.
Foreign parties have in principle the same position both in courts and before the Slovak Industrial Property Office as nationals or residents of the Slovak Republic. As far as the language barrier is concerned, a court is obliged to grant translation at the expenses of the party not speaking the Slovak language. In case there is a citizen of the Slovak Republic who does not speak Slovak, in court, the translation fees are paid by the State. Unlike a court proceeding, in an administrative proceeding before the Slovak Industrial Property Office a foreign party has to be represented by his or her patent attorney authorised to act before SIPO, that is, a patent attorney acting in the Slovak Republic.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 3. Please identify any requirement that a foreign party must meet to initiate a proceeding in the courts and administrative bodies identified in answer to question 1 that is not required of a national or resident of the Slovak Republic and cite the legal authorities providing for those differences.
See the reply to question 2. As has already been stated, the position of a foreign party is in principle identical with that of a citizen of the Slovak Republic.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 4. Articles 41.1 and 48 of the TRIPS Agreement require establishment of safeguards against abuse of judicial and administrative enforcement procedures, including provision for adequate compensation for injury suffered because of such abuse. Please describe the means available under the law of the Slovak Republic to prevent abuse of judicial and administrative procedures or to remedy damages suffered as a result of such abuse and cite the legal authorities for those means.
The question of compensation for injury suffered because of abuse of judicial and administrative enforcement procedures is provided for by the Act on liability for injury suffered because of a State authority decision or because of wrong administrative procedure No. 58/1969 Coll. In the case of an injury caused by illegal decision or sentence it is necessary to make a formal claim for damage at the central authority superior to that authority which has caused the injury. Where the claim is not settled within 6 months, the injured party is able to claim his or her right in court. The State is liable for injuries caused by abuse of administrative proceedings. In this case no preliminary hearing of the claim is necessary. The claim can be prosecuted directly against the State and the particular authority which has caused the injury.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 5. Article 41.2 addresses, among other things, the cost of judicial and administrative enforcement proceedings. Please describe any fees charged by judicial or administrative officials for filing legal actions involving intellectual property or for pursuing such actions once initiated, cite the legal authorities for such fees, and provide copies of the documents used to inform the public of such fees.
Legal fees are established by the Act on Legal Fees No. 71/1992, Digest of Laws. In the general part of this Act the following subjects are treated: legal fees, payers, exemption from legal fees, occurrence and cessation of payment duty, etc. A separate part of the Act, the Scale of Legal Fees, establishes particular amounts chargeable as fees. Considering enforcement of intellectual property rights, the second item is especially important, as long as it deals with actions concerning patents, inventions, industrial designs, layout-designs, topographies of semiconductor products as well as with copyright and other related rights. Legal fees here account for 4% of the price of the chose in action, the minimum being Sk 500, and the maximum Sk 500 000. In case the chose in action cannot be financially valued (e.g. in action for determination whether there exists any law at all), the legal fee is then established as Sk 2 000. Trade name rights actions, trademark actions and label of origin actions are regulated by Item 3 of the Scale of Legal Fees, all of these actions requiring a charge of Sk3 000. Legal fees are due as soon as the action is filed and also when a party is appealing against a decision. Administrative fees, that is the fees due for acts of administrative proceedings, are generally regulated by the Act on Administrative Fees No. 145/1995, Digest of Laws. As well as the Act on Legal Fees, this Act consists of two parts in its general part it treats the subject of administrative fees, of payers, of the occurrence of payment duty, etc. Its second part establishes legal fees according to specific legal acts. From the point of view of enforcement of intellectual property rights, Part XVI of the Scale of Legal Fees is especially important, as it establishes fees for acts in enforcement proceedings before the Slovak Industrial Property Office. As examples we cite here a few of the most important items: patent application – Sk 800, request for patent examining procedure up to 10 claims – Sk 2 500, patent deed up to 10 pages – Sk 2 000, extending the patent life, the third, the fourth and the fifth year, total – Sk 5 000, the sixth year – Sk 1 700, lay out design application – Sk 700, industrial design application – Sk 600, topography of semiconductor products application – Sk 5 000, trademark application up to 3 segments of products or services – Sk 3 000, request for erasure of a trademark from the register of trademarks – Sk 600, request for a renewal of trademark registration – Sk 2 500, application for label of origin – Sk 2 000. Legal and administrative fees are established in relevant Acts in the Digest of Laws and thus are fully available to public. Please refer to the relevant passages of both Acts set out in the Annex.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 6. Article 41.2 also addresses the timeliness of judicial and administrative enforcement proceedings. Please cite to the legal authorities establishing any time limits for judicial and administrative proceedings and, if it has not already been done, provide copies of the laws or regulations in question.
Procedural regulation of civil proceedings in court establishes no strict time periods concerning the end of a proceeding which is, eventually the court decision. On the other hand, pursuant to Article 48, paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the Slovak Republic, "Everybody has the right to have his or her case heard publicly, without unnecessary delays and in his or her presence...". This basic human right is extended in Section 100, paragraph 1 of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure, which goes as follows: "As soon as the proceeding has been initiated, the court proceeds further, even if there are no further proposals, and in such a manner that the case be heard and decided as fast as possible." The issue of delays in legal proceedings has already been treated by the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic, which in a particular case proclaimed unnecessary delays in legal proceedings as violation of a basic human right, in accordance with the wording of the cited regulation of Article 48 of the Constitution of the Slovak Republic. The Slovak Code of Civil Procedure establishes also quite a few time periods concerning the procedural law. Section 204 establishes the time period available for appeal against a decision as 15 days since the decision delivery. Section 230 establishes the time period for a special legal remedy, in particular a re enforcement of proceedings as a limitation of 3 months since the reasons for re enforcement cited in the law were discovered and 3 years since the finality of judgment. Section 240 also establishes a time period of 3 months for a special legal remedy appeal against a decision, which can also be applied only on the basis of explicitly specified reasons, which in general represent violation of the law from the side of the court. Section 250, letter b) establishes a time period of two months allowed for a legal revision of a decision adopted by an administrative body. Section 160, paragraph 1 establishes a time period of three days for complying with the obligation resulting from a court decision, if the court does not specify a different time period. Only Section 75, paragraph 2 of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure establishes a duty for the court to decide in the matter of application for preliminary measures. Civil Code of Law also provides for a considerably large number of time periods concerning the material law. Sections 100 to 105 of the Civil Code of Law establish a time period for enforcement as being three years since the law could have been enforced for the first time. Section 106, the Civil Code of Law establishes a time period that allows to enforce a claim for damage of three years since the damage occurred, at the last, however, the claim has to be enforced within two years since the injured party found out who was responsible for the damage. The right to claim damage for a bodily injury never lapses, thus it can always be enforced. The right of submitting groundless pecuniary advantage is enforceable within the same time period, otherwise it lapses. The right to execute a valid court decision or administrative decision lapses after the term of ten years since that decision came into effect. For administrative proceedings there exists a key regulation the Act on Administrative Proceedings No. 71/1967, Digest of Laws, pursuant to which the proceedings in the Slovak Industrial Property Office are also carried out and, if a special legal regulation does not state it otherwise, Section 49 establishes time periods available for reaching decisions in administrative proceedings. In simple cases the respective administrative body is obliged to reach a decision without any delays, in other cases, if a special legal regulation does not state it otherwise, the administrative body is obliged to reach a decision within 30 days, in difficult cases within 60 days, since the proceedings initiation. If it is not possible with respect to the nature of the case to reach a decision within the established term of 60 days, an appellate body has to decide in matters of possible prolongation of the term. If the term is to be prolonged beyond 30, eventually 60 days, the party to the enforcement proceedings has to be duly notified. Pursuant to Section 54, a party to a proceeding is able to appeal against a decision within the time period of 15 days since the decision was announced, that means, in principle, delivered in writing. Concerning enforcement of trademark rights, this time period is extended up to one month. Other time periods with respect to enforcement of special legal remedies are established in sections 53 to 68. As far as the Act on Trademarks is concerned, the time periods allowing a party to appeal against a decision are modified, as has already been stated above in Section 42, and this prolongation applies also to grievances against a published application for a trademark according to Section 9, where the time period is up to three months.
05/05/1999
IP/Q4/SVK/1 République slovaque États-Unis d'Amérique 7. Please explain any provisions in the enforcement system in the Slovak Republic that ensure expeditious remedies. In addition, please explain what provisions are available to prevent deliberate delays by the parties to a proceeding and indicate the circumstances in which such provisions will be applied.
The measure, which is available and also used to prevent deliberate delays of legal proceedings is predominantly the regulation of Section 101, the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure. This regulation orders all the parties to contribute as much as possible to reaching the aim of the proceeding, above all by identification of evidence and heeding the orders of the court. The court proceeds further, even if the parties are not active. If a summoned party does not appear in person without submitting a request for postponing the hearing, the court is authorised to act in the party’s absence, with regard to the content of the file and to the evidence so far presented. If the court appeals to a party to make a statement regarding a particular proposal, it can attach to it a warning, that if the party does not make any statements within a certain time period, he or she will be taken as having no objections to the proposal in question. The court can adopt disciplinary measures against a party that is inactive and ignorant of the court's appeals, these measures including fines and even judgment summons by the police. Such a party can also be ordered to pay the legal fees caused by him or her. Disciplinary measures are established in Sections 53 and 54, as well as in other regulations of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure. There is an analogous regulation in the Act on Administrative Proceedings, stating that deliberate protraction of proceedings caused by inactivity or disobedience of the competent body on the side of a party or a third party can be penalised by a financial fine. Pursuant to Section 50, Act on Administrative Proceedings, if the administrative body does not act in the case, or eventually does not reach any decision within the time periods established for these purposes by law, that is in the above-mentioned time periods of 30 and 60 days, and if the remedy cannot be granted otherwise, the superior body, which would normally function as an appellate body, is authorised to decide the case.
05/05/1999

Page 13 de 677   |   Nombre de documents : 13533

 
Réinitialiser