Greece: Important amendments to code of civil procedure

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Greece: Important amendments to code of civil procedure

As of January 1 2016, Law 4335/2015 has come into force. This law was passed in the context of structural reforms imposed by Greece's creditors as a condition to the bailout with an objective to accelerate judicial proceedings and includes important amendments to the code of civil procedure.

In accordance with these new provisions, the procedure for main action proceedings before the courts of first instance is amended from a partially oral procedure, which included an oral examination of witnesses, to a written procedure. In exceptional cases the court may consider that the case not been sufficiently clear in order to reach a decision and may summon witnesses to be examined orally.

Moreover, in accordance with the new system, starting from the date of filing of the lawsuit, certain deadlines are set within which the foreseen procedures should have been concluded, contrary to the practice followed until now.

In this context, the briefs are submitted within a term of 100 or 130 days (if the party is based abroad) from the filing of the lawsuit and the additional pleadings within the following 15 days from the expiry of the above deadline. With the lapse of this deadline the file of the case is technically considered completed, that is mature for a judgment to be delivered.

Within a term of 15 days starting from the date that the file is closed, the judge rapporteur is appointed, while at the same time a hearing date for the discussion of the case is fixed within 30 days.

It should be noted that at the hearing no witnesses are examined. The examination of witnesses takes place if this is considered

absolutely necessary following the study of the file. In such a case, the repetition of the hearing is ordered and following the end of the testimonies, the repetition of the hearing is considered concluded. The evaluation of the testimonies shall be conducted within a term of eight working days

As regards preliminary injunction proceedings, according to the new provisions, the judge has to decide within 48 hours following the hearing or following the expiry of the deadline granted to the parties for submitting a memorandum. Alternatively, the judge may deliver a judgment beyond the 48 hour deadline but in any case within 30 days of the hearing or memorandum submission deadline. The law provides that the court's reasoning be brief.

While at present, in case of a preliminary injunction granted, the applicant has to follow up with a main action within 30 days of the judgment, according to the new law, the judge has full discretion in setting a deadline for filing a main action.

kilimiris-constantinos.jpg

Constantinos Kilimiris


Patrinos & Kilimiris7, Hatziyianni Mexi Str.GR-11528 AthensGreeceTel: +30210 7222906, 7222050Fax: +30210 7222889info@patrinoskilimiris.comwww.patrinoskilimiris.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Brian Paul Gearing brings technical depth, litigation expertise, and experience with Japanese business culture to Pillsbury’s IP practice
News of InterDigital suing Amazon in the US and CMS IndusLaw challenging Indian rules on foreign firms were also among the top talking points
IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
In the sixth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Futures, a network for early-career stage IP professionals
Rachel Cohen has reunited with her former colleagues to strengthen Weil’s IP litigation and strategy work
McKool Smith’s Jennifer Truelove explains how a joint effort between her firm and Irell & Manella secured a win for their client against Samsung
Gift this article