The 2023 Amendments To The Austrian Code Of Civil Procedure: What's New?

• Law Firm: OBLIN Attorneys at Law LLP
• Subject Matter: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Court Procedure, Civil Law
• Author: Mr Per Neuburger and Klaus Oblin
• Published date: 31 July 2023

On 14 July 2023, amendments to the Austrian Code of Civil Procedure (Zivilprozessordnung, ACCP) entered into force.¹ During the COVID-19 pandemic, laws had been introduced that temporarily allowed for remote hearings and evidence-taking under certain circumstances. These temporary provisions expired on 30 June 2023. Now, the Austrian legislature has adopted permanent versions of the COVID-19 era rules, albeit in a more limited form.

Below, the most notable changes to the ACCP are outlined. Readers should note that the 2023 amendments are not limited to the ACCP but include the Non-Contentious Proceedings Act (Au'erstreitgesetz), the Commitment Act (Unterbringungsgesetz), the Enforcement Act (Exekutionsordnung), and others. The focus of this article will be exclusively on the ACCP.

Remote Hearings

With the newly introduced Section 132a (1) ACCP, the legislature intends to create the possibility for remote (or hybrid) hearings to be held in civil proceedings.²

The court may allow all or some participants of a civil proceeding to participate in a hearing remotely. This possibility, however, is limited: The court has discretion on whether to allow remote participation, whereby it must consider procedural economy and the available technical facilities. Furthermore, before allowing a remote hearing, the court must either have the express approval of all parties or must announce the remote hearing while granting the parties the possibility to object within a certain time period. If any party objects in a timely manner, holding a remote hearing is not permitted. Parties do not have a right to request the court to conduct a hearing remotely; they may only suggest that the court do so.

By limiting the possibility for remote hearings to be held, the legislature intends for these to remain the exception rather than the norm.³ In particular, the reference to the procedural economy as a statutory requirement to hold a remote hearing is notable. The legislative materials make clear that procedural economy speaks for a remote hearing when it would be possible to, for example, set an earlier hearing date, avoid a postponement, or reduce the costs of the proceedings because of less travel to the court.⁴

Even during a remote hearing, the judge must be present in the courtroom.

Virtual Taking of Evidence

Before the 2023 revisions and even before the COVID-19 pandemic, the virtual taking of evidence was possible in Austrian civil proceedings pursuant to Section 277 ACCP. This...