It has been over a year and a half since Act No. 307/2016 Coll. on Reminder Proceedings and on Amendments to Certain Acts (hereinafter also referred to as the “Act on Reminder Proceedings”) entered into force on February 1, 2017, following a two-month legislative cooling-off period. Given the current legal bloat or the textual complexity of legal regulations, it can be said that this Act deviates from the norm, as we believe it is written relatively clearly and, above all, concisely, since the core of the Act, Article I, contains only 15 sections. However, the legislator’s brevity has not resulted in a lower quality of this legal regulation; on the contrary, the Act essentially introduces a new type of civil procedure into the legal system of the Slovak Republic, through which certain private law relationships are to be governed. Reminder proceedings are a novelty in the area of issuing payment orders. It can be said that this is a kind of alternative method for resolving disputes over monetary performance, as this type of proceeding operates in parallel with the standard proceeding governed by Act No. 150/2016 Coll., the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter also referred to as the “Civil Procedure Code”). In practice, this means that it is entirely up to the plaintiff’s discretion whether to pursue their claim under Section 265 et seq. of the Civil Procedure Code or through reminder proceedings. It should be noted, however, that the Civil Procedure Code applies subsidiarily to reminder proceedings, with the exception of Section 126.
-
The payment order itself can be classified as a procedural decision in which the claim appears to be undisputed, which is intended to ensure the speed and simplicity of the proceedings. This abbreviated form of proceedings is governed by Section 265 et seq. of the Civil Procedure Code. Let us, however, examine some of the differences between the reminder proceedings and the proceedings governed by the Civil Procedure Code.
A distinctive feature of this procedure is that the only competent court in reminder proceedings is the Banská Bystrica District Court, whereas in proceedings under the Civil Procedure Code, court jurisdiction is determined in accordance with the standard rules on determining court jurisdiction (Section 13 et seq. of the CPC).
Reminder proceedings are exclusively electronic proceedings and result in a decision to issue a payment order. It should be noted that, under certain conditions, filing a motion for a payment order under the CSP may also be done electronically. The filing of a motion for a payment order in reminder proceedings may be carried out exclusively in electronic form. This motion must be authorized, i.e., “signed” with a qualified electronic signature (a chip-enabled ID card and a card reader are required). The rules on authorization apply mutatis mutandis to the plaintiff’s legal representative or attorney. It is not possible to file a claim in any format; instead, it is necessary to use standardized electronic forms, which can be found on the website of the Ministry of Justice of the Slovak Republic or at www.slovensko.sk. These forms are not only required for filing a petition for a payment order but also for filing an objection to a payment order or a request for payment of a claim in installments, which is a new legal mechanism introduced by the Act on Reminder Proceedings. All attachments intended to support the claims set forth in the application or objection must also be attached electronically along with the filings. However, authorization in the form of a guaranteed electronic signature is no longer required when submitting attachments.
If the reminder proceedings concern accounting entities—that is, if both parties to the dispute are business entities— it is sufficient for the plaintiff to attach to the petition an invoice that has not been paid by the passively legitimized entity (the plaintiff thus has a legitimate expectation of payment) and simultaneously declare that the asserted claim is recorded in their accounting records. If the party with standing to sue is also a VAT payer, they may also state that the claim has been included in their VAT return.
Just as submissions addressed to the court, so too does service by the court to the parties to the proceedings take place electronically; however, the court serves documents electronically only if the party to the proceedings has an electronic mailbox set up and if the court is able to deliver this mail to them; otherwise, it proceeds in accordance with the law, i.e., it delivers the documents to the defendant in physical paper form.
If the court determines that the procedural conditions have been met, the fee requirements have been met, and the plaintiff’s claim is well-founded, within 10 days of these conditions being met, it will issue a payment order, in which the court orders the defendant to fulfill the obligations set forth in this payment order within 15 days or to file an objection against it within the same period.
In conclusion, it is important to note one of the most significant advantages of the reminder procedure, namely that the court fee is reduced by 50% in reminder proceedings compared to regular proceedings. This is particularly advantageous in disputes involving larger sums of money. When filing an objection in a summary proceeding, no court fee is payable at all.
It is indisputable that summary proceedings offer many advantages. Above all, these include the speed, simplicity, and efficiency of the proceedings, as well as their “cost,” since court fees are significantly reduced, whether for filing a petition or an objection. Although debt collection proceedings appear simple at first glance, even here a party may encounter difficulties with the court’s formalized procedure, and it may happen that a party’s filing is rejected by the court due to various formal and procedural requirements. For this reason, it is advisable for any party to a debt collection proceeding to consult a legal representative—an attorney—in any case. This will prevent unnecessary complications and ensure that the party enforces their rights as quickly as possible.
