Using videoconferencing to obtain evidence in civil and commercial matters under Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001



Similar documents
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES GREEN PAPER

Red Europea de Formación Judicial (REFJ) European Judicial Training Network (EJTN) Réseau Européen de Formation Judiciaire (REFJ)

Italy. However, Italian law does contain references to videoconferencing.

Council of the European Union Brussels, 29 May 2015 (OR. en)

Legal English terminology in a National and European context 8-11 December Programme

Public consultation on the European Small Claims Procedure

Videoconferencing in Crossborder Court Proceedings. Facilitating the Use with Documentation

2015 No. 548 (L. 6) MENTAL CAPACITY, ENGLAND AND WALES. The Court of Protection (Amendment) Rules 2015

Act to Implement Certain Legal Instruments in the Field of International Family Law (International Family Law Procedure Act IFLPA)

Making a cross border claim in the EU

PUBLIC COU CIL OF THE EUROPEA U IO. Brussels, 30 June 2005 (05.07) (OR. fr) 10748/05 LIMITE JUR 291 JUSTCIV 130 CODEC 579

Guide on videoconferencing in cross-border proceedings

financial interests and the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor.

(Dieses Übereinkommen wurde nur in englisch und französisch erstellt; bitte hier klicken für die deutsche Übersetzung.)

Knowhow briefs The Brussels regulation at a glance

Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION (EU) implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of the law applicable to divorce and legal separation

Legal English terminology in a national and European context 8-11 December Programme

THE PRINCIPLE OF SUBSIDIARITY

The new European directive on the rights to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings

002400/EU XXV. GP. Eingelangt am 18/11/13. Brussels, 16 November 2013 COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION 16030/1/13 REV 1

Section 1: Development of the EU s competence in the field of police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters

Data Protection A Guide for Users

Official Journal of the European Union. (Acts whose publication is obligatory) COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2201/2003. of 27 November 2003

Issued 22 April Schedule to the Allocation and Gatekeeping Guidance Private Law

ECC-Net European Small Claims Procedure Report. September 2012

Opinion Statement of the CFE. on the proposed Directive. on the fight against fraud to the EU s financial interests. by means of criminal law

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction

PRACTICE DIRECTION 12A CARE, SUPERVISION AND OTHER PART 4 PROCEEDINGS: GUIDE TO CASE MANAGEMENT

RESOLUTION No 2 /2012 INTERNATIONAL CIVIL LITIGATION AND THE INTERESTS OF THE PUBLIC

THE RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN DECISIONS IN DENMARK by partner Anne Buhl Bjelke, Bech-Bruun

Registered with the Solicitors Regulation Authority Registered with the Madrid Bar INSOLVENCY LAW DEPARTMENT

14. CONVENTION ON THE SERVICE ABROAD OF JUDICIAL AND EXTRAJUDICIAL DOCUMENTS IN CIVIL OR COMMERCIAL MATTERS 1. (Concluded 15 November 1965)

Chapter 4 BELGIUM. In Belgium, three sets of rules can apply to the recognition and enforcement of foreign insolvency proceedings.

NOTICE OF THE POWERS TO SEARCH PREMISES AND OF THE RIGHTS OF OCCUPIERS UNDER SECTION 194 OF THE ENTERPRISE ACT 2002 ( THE ACT )

VIDEOCONFERENCING BOOKINGS, PROCEDURES & INVOICING FOR NORTHERN TERRITORY COURTS

General Practice Direction Direction given under section 18B of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975

Guide to Statutory Demands for those presenting and receiving one

Videoconferencing. Findings and State-of-play. Informal Working Group on Cross-border Videoconferencing

HAGUE CONFERENCE ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW CONFÉRENCE DE LA HAYE DE DROIT INTERNATIONAL PRIVÉ

The Amendment of the Loan Agreement (for Business)/ Overdraft Facility Agreement (for Consumption)/ Money Mortgage Agreement*

Ligitation process in Denmark 1. Litigation process in Denmark. A brief summary of the procedures and workings of the litigation process in Denmark.

Rethink the mental health act. essential information for parents and carers

PRACTICE DIRECTION AMENDMENTS

PERMANENT COURT OF ARBITRATION OPTIONAL RULES FOR ARBITRATING DISPUTES BETWEEN TWO STATES

CHAPTER NINE DISPUTES SETTLEMENT ARTICLE 187 Scope of the Chapter The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to the settlement of disputes concerning

Improving Court Performance through Improved Communication and Coordination with Other Courts and Agencies: Serbia s Experience

ELECTRONIC COMMERCE DIRECTIVE, DIRECTIVE 2000/31/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND

Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL. amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 on insolvency proceedings

List of the general good provisions applicable to insurance and reinsurance intermediaries FEBRUARY 2011

2014 No (L. 31) TRIBUNALS AND INQUIRIES. The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Rules 2014

Liechtenstein. Heinz Frommelt. Sele Frommelt & Partners Attorneys at Law Ltd

(Legislative acts) DIRECTIVES

Official Journal of the European Communities

Matrimonial Property Regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships - How should the UK approach the Commission s proposals in

Chapter 5 Winding up Circumstances in which company may be wound up by the court. Chapter 6 Restoration Restoration by the court.

Clearer rules for international couples frequently asked questions

Working with foreign authorities: child protection cases and care orders

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES GREEN PAPER. on applicable law and jurisdiction in divorce matters. (presented by the Commission)

Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION

The Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013

Council of the European Union Brussels, 12 September 2014 (OR. en)

Powers of Attorney in New South Wales. This fact sheet also contains the forms to make a general power of attorney or an enduring power of attorney.

The intention of this guide is to provide information on how to make your claim through the European Small Claims Procedure.

NETWORKING POSSIBILITIES FOR DEFENCE COUNSEL IN THE EU. Co-funded by the Criminal Justice Programme of the European Union

Expert Group Meeting on the Technical and Legal Obstacles to the Use of Videoconferencing

EU COMMISSION CONSULTATION ON THE FUTURE OF EUROPEAN INSOLVENCY LAW

DIRECTIVE 2009/38/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

Does the Regulation Apply?

Insolvency of members of a group of companies

Personal Data Act (1998:204);

European judicial training Justice

Fit and Proper Principles paper

Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union Civil Judicial Cooperation

POSITION OF THE NOTARIES OF EUROPE ON THE POST-STOCKHOLM PROGRAMME

Revising the EC Insolvency Regulation: the final cut

THE FREE MOVEMENT OF JUDGMENTS WITHIN THE EUROPEAN UNION: PROCESS OF RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS

Consultation on the future of European Insolvency Law

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND COUNCIL DIRECTIVE. on a common framework for electronic signatures

Rules of Procedure. of the Administrative Tribunal of the Bank for International Settlements. Article 1

CALL FOR AN EXPRESSION OF INTEREST FOR A SECONDED NATIONAL EXPERT WITHIN EUROJUST:

ISTANBUL ARBITRATION CENTRE ARBITRATION RULES

PUBLIC COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 8 July /05 LIMITE CRIMORG 67 ENFOPOL 88

Danemark Cour suprême Denmark Supreme Court

This Practice Direction supplements FPR Part 22. in any application for an order against anyone for alleged contempt of court.

COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) / of XXX

Study to inform a subsequent Impact Assessment on the Commission proposal on jurisdiction and applicable law in divorce matters

The technical and legal obstacles to the use of videoconferencing

Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION. on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office. {SWD(2013) 274 final} {SWD(2013) 275 final}

In force as of 15 March 2005 based on decision by the President of NIB ARBITRATION REGULATIONS

The coordination of healthcare in Europe

Conference interpreting with information and communication technologies experiences from the European Commission DG Interpretation

15414/14 ADD 1 AVI/abs 1 DG D 2A

Electronic Commerce ELECTRONIC COMMERCE ACT Act. No Commencement LN. 2001/ Assent

A new Danish Arbitration Act came into force on 1 July It is largely based on the UNCITRAL model law.

REPORT ON THE EXCHANGE AND SUMMARY

Draft conclusions of the Council and of the Member States on the civil and commercial justice systems of the Member States

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 17 December 2003 (OR. en) 14994/03. Interinstitutional File: 2002/0043 (CNS) MIGR 101

ANNEX II. General Overview of the Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of Origin and Their International Registration.

Supreme Court Civil Supplementary Rules 2014

Transcription:

Using videoconferencing to obtain evidence in civil and commercial matters under Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001 A practical guide European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters

This document has been drawn up by the Commission Services and the European Judicial Network in Civil and Commercial Matters (http://ec.europa.eu/civiljustice). Recognising the advantages that videoconferencing can bring to obtaining evidence in cross-border cases, the European Judicial Network in Civil and Commercial Matters has produced this guide to provide practical information to assist judges to make greater use of videoconferencing to obtain evidence in civil and commercial matters under Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001. Furthermore, in the framework of the European e-justice action plan, the Member States of the European Union have agreed to work together to promote the use of videoconferencing and to exchange experiences and best practices. Such work takes place within the existing legal framework and respects the procedural safeguards in place at both Member State and European Union level. As a result, a manual and a booklet covering the use of videoconferencing equipment in cross-border court proceedings in the European Union have been completed. This document is meant to complement that information. 3

Introduction Where a case is contested, it is often necessary for a court to obtain evidence in order for a claim to be proved. Evidence can be provided in a number of ways and sometimes it is necessary to hear from people such as witnesses or experts. The process of obtaining evidence becomes more complicated when it has to be obtained from another country. Barriers can be created by the physical distance between the court and the person to be examined and differences between the rules and laws in each jurisdiction. It was for that reason that one of the first civil judicial cooperation instruments to be adopted by the Council of the European Union was Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 on the cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters. While this leaflet concentrates on Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 it is important to note that provisions on evidence exist in other instruments as well. For example, under Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 861/2007, which established a European Small Claims Procedure, a court or tribunal determines the means of taking evidence and the extent of the evidence necessary for its judgment under the rules applicable to the admissibility of evidence. It may admit taking of evidence through written statements of witnesses, experts or parties and, importantly, may also admit taking of evidence through videoconference or other communication technology if the technical means are available. In recognition of the advantages that videoconferencing can bring to obtaining evidence in cross-border cases, the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters (EJN civil) has produced this leaflet to provide practical information to assist judges to make greater use of videoconferencing. 4

Regulation 1206/2001 This Regulation lays down procedural rules to make it easier to take evidence in another Member State. The Regulation has been applicable since 1 January 2004 throughout the Union in all Member States except Denmark. Between the Member States concerned it replaces the Hague Convention of 1970. A Practice Guide which gives more details of the Regulation can be found at: http://ec.europa.eu/civiljustice/publications/ docs/guide_taking_evidence_en.pdf The Regulation itself can be found at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/lexuriserv/ LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2001:174:0001:0024 :EN:PDF The Regulation applies to only civil and commercial cases and cannot be used to obtain evidence which is not intended for use in judicial proceedings, commenced or contemplated. It provides two main channels for providing the necessary evidence. The first, under Article 10, is where the court in one Member State requests the court in another Member State to obtain the evidence. The second, under Article 17,, allows a court in one Member State, with the permission of the requested Member State, to obtain the evidence directly in that Member State. Details of the competent courts in each Member State and the requirements of each jurisdiction can be found on the European Judicial Atlas at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/ judicialatlascivil/html/te_information_en.htm Where a requested court undertakes to obtain evidence on behalf of a requesting court under Articles 10 to 12, that evidence is obtained in accordance with the law of the requested Member State and can be subject to coercive measures. Where a requesting court wishes to obtain evidence directly under Article 17 it must apply to the requested Member State s central body or competent authority. There are only limited grounds on which such a request can be refused. These are that the request does not fall within the scope of the Regulation; that it does not contain all necessary information; or, that the request is contrary to the fundamental principles of law in the requested Member State. In deciding whether to allow a request under Article 17, the central body of the requested Member State may specify conditions under which the evidence can be obtained. When such a request is accepted, it is the responsibility of the requesting court to designate and provide the person or persons to obtain the evidence. An important distinction that applies to direct taking of evidence is that it can only be performed on a voluntary basis and coercive measures cannot be used. Where a request includes the hearing of a person it is the responsibility of the requesting court to inform that person of these rights. 5

Using videoconferencing The Regulation encourages the use of communications technology at the performance of the taking of evidence, in particular via videoconference and teleconference. The EJN civil has also promoted the use of videoconferencing both through practical demonstrations at its annual meeting in Lisbon in 2006 and by providing members with the details of the videoconference facilities in the Member States. Information on which courts are equipped with videoconferencing facilities can also be found on the European Judicial Atlas. Since June 2007 the Justice and Home Affairs Council has been considering developments in the field of e-justice which have included the use of videoconferencing. Representatives of all Member States and EU institutions have expressed support for the development of videoconferencing in cross-border cases. Within the Council, the Working Party on e-justice has produced a manual and a booklet covering the use of videoconferencing equipment in cross-border court proceedings in the European Union. This practical guide is meant to complement this work. Despite this encouragement and the work done so far to promote its use, it is clear that there is inconsistent use of videoconferencing in the Member States. In recognition of the advantages that videoconferencing can bring to obtaining evidence in cross-border cases, the EJN civil has produced this leaflet to provide practical information to assist judges to make greater use of videoconferencing. Although a political decision has been made to apply different considerations to the way evidence is handled depending on whether it has been obtained by a requested court on behalf of a requesting court or directly by the requesting court, it is clear that Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 envisages greater use of modern technology to facilitate taking of evidence. Recital 8 states that the efficiency of judicial procedures in civil or commercial matters requires that the transmission and execution of requests for the performance of taking of evidence is to be made directly and by the most rapid means possible between Member States' courts. The most efficient way to obtain evidence directly is via videoconference. Otherwise, it will be necessary for the witness to travel to the requesting court in another country or for officials from the court to travel to see the witness. This obviously adds time and expense to the procedure. Videoconferencing is a cheap and effective solution to these problems. Although sensitive issues might arise in some family cases where the use of videoconferencing might not be appropriate, in the vast majority of cases within the scope of the Regulation the use of videoconferencing for hearings should not create any barriers. Videoconferencing facilities are not installed in all civil courts in each Member State but in 6

some Member States it might be possible to use installed facilities in other local premises such as criminal courts, prisons or in private facilities where they are available. Some Member States have mobile units and equipment can often be hired. As time progresses, it is likely that more and more courts will have the necessary facilities. Of course, the more demand there is for videoconferencing from local courts, the more likely it will be that equipment will be made available. A court that wishes to obtain evidence directly from a witness in another Member State can do so under Article 17 of the Regulation. The advantage of such a request is that the evidence can be obtained under the law of the requesting State. A request needs to be made to the requested Member State s central body or competent authority using Form I in the Annex to the Regulation. The central body or the competent authority should, within 30 days, inform the requesting court if the request is accepted and, if so, under what c o n d i t i o n s. When a request for direct taking of evidence is accepted, it is the responsibility of the requesting court to designate and provide the person or persons to obtain the evidence. It is also the responsibility of the requesting court to inform the witness that the evidence can only be provided on a voluntary basis. Videoconferencing is also possible under Articles 10 to 12 of the Regulation where a court requests a court in another Member State to obtain evidence for it. The requested court is required to execute the request within 90 days of receipt. It will do so in accordance with the law of its Member State. The requesting court can ask for the request to be executed in accordance with a special procedure provided that it is not incompatible with the law of the Member State of the requested court or because of reasons of major practical difficulties. In such cases, the parties and/or representatives of the requesting court can be present at the hearing and participate, either in person or via videoconference, provided such participation is allowed under the law of the Member State of the request. It is for the requested court to determine the conditions under which they may participate. 7

Practical considerations A number of questions arise when deciding whether and how to obtain evidence by videoconference. These questions, together with answers, are provided below. Further information on the situation in each Member State can be found in factsheets on the European Judicial Atlas in Civil Matters 1 How do I know whether a Member State will allow either participation in a videoconference or direct taking of evidence via a videoconference? Check the information given in that Member State s factsheet on the Judicial Atlas website. 1 Are there any restrictions as to the type of evidence that can be obtained or the place where the hearing should be held via videoconference in a particular Member State? Check the information given in that Member State s factsheet on the Judicial Atlas website. 2 Where can the details of the competent courts under the 3 Regulation be found? The courts that have been designated by the Member States can be found on the European Judicial Atlas at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice home/judicialatlascivil/ html/te_searchmunicipality_en.jsp#statepage0 How do I find the contact details for the central body 4 or competent authority of another Member State? These can also be found on the European Judicial Atlas at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/ judicialatlascivil/html/te_centralbody_en.htm If a central body or a competent authority authorises a request 5 to take evidence directly under Article 17 by way of videoconference, how can I identify the nearest court or other premises to the person to be examined that has videoconferencing facilities? This information can be found on the European Judicial Atlas at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/ judicialatlascivil/html/te_centralbody_en.htm 8 1 This information is available on the "Taking evidence" page ("Communications from Member States") at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/judicialatlascivil/html/te_information_en.htm

How do I know in what language the request should be made? The answer can be found in the section on Communications of the Member States, again on the European Judicial Atlas at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/ judicialatlascivil/html/te_otherinfo_en.htm 6 Which forms do I use to make the request? Where a request is to be made under Articles 10 to 12 to participate in taking of evidence via a videoconference, Form A should be completed. Requests for direct taking of evidence under Article 17 should be made on Form I. These, and all the other forms under the Regulation, can also be found, completed and translated on the European Judicial Atlas at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/ judicialatlascivil/html/te_filling_en.htm 7 How do I know whether costs will be charged by the other 8 Member State? Check the information given in that Member State s factsheet on the Judicial Atlas website. Who is responsible for notifying the person to be examined that he/she should attend? Generally, when the request is made to participate in a hearing under Articles 10 to 12, the requested court will make the necessary arrangements. Where a request for direct taking of evidence is accepted by a Member State under Article 17, that Member State will usually leave the requesting Member State to make the necessary contacts and arrangements. Check the details for each Member State on the Judicial Atlas website. 9 11 How can the identity of the person to be examined be 10 proved? Check the information given in that Member State s factsheet on the Judicial Atlas website. Is it possible or allowed to record the hearing? Check the information given in that Member State s factsheet on the Judicial Atlas website. 9

Which law applies to the execution of the request? Where a court requests to participate in a videoconference under Articles 10 to 12, the law that is applied is the law of the requested Member State. However, the requesting court may ask for a special procedure provided by its law and the requested court will comply with such a requirement unless that procedure is incompatible with its law or for reason of major practical difficulties. When a request is accepted for direct taking of evidence under Article 17, the requesting court executes the request in accordance with the law of its Member State, subject to the fact that no coercive measures may be applied. How do I know in what language the hearing should be conducted and, if interpreters are necessary, who is responsible for providing them? In general, where a requested court obtains evidence under Articles 10 to 12,, the hearing will be conducted in the language of that court. 12 13 14 For further information about the use of interpreters and the language that should be used for direct taking of evidence under Article 17, check the relevant Member State s section on the Judicial Atlas website. What additional information will the other Member State require? Check the relevant Member State s factsheet on the Judicial Atlas website. 10

European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters Contact European Commission Directorate-General for Justice, Freedom and Security European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters Rue du Luxembourg, 46 B-1000 Brussels http://ec.europa.eu/civiljustice/