In what circumstances, if any, can claims be disposed of without a full trial?
Litigation (2nd edition)
A court might dismiss a statement of claim ex officio before a hearing on the merits of the case takes place, if the claim lacks the procedural minimum requirements for a trial, such as jurisdiction of the court, the capacity of the parties to sue and be sued and the formal requirements of a statement of claim. Moreover, a defendant may file for an early dismissal, if the claim is already time-barred, inconclusive, or if procedural requirements are missing (i.e. lack of jurisdiction).
If any party fails to file a legal document, such as a statement of defense, within due time or fails to attend a scheduled hearing, the other party may request the court to issue a default judgment.
A simplified procedure applies with respect to monetary claims up to EUR 75,000 (Mahnverfahren). The plaintiff simply has to fill out a standardized form (as a statement of claim), on the basis of which the court then issues a payment order. The defendant has the choice to either pay the claimed amount or to raise an objection within four weeks of service of the payment order. If the defendant objects in due time, the payment order will be set aside and an ordinary proceeding will be initiated. However, if the defendant does not raise a valid objection, the payment order becomes binding and enforceable (like a final judgment) without any prior hearing on the merits of the case.
Moreover, under certain circumstances, the court may render interim and partial judgments during the course of a main proceeding. Additionally, a proceeding ends without a judgment on the merits if an amicable settlement is reached during an ongoing proceeding.
As described in #4, there are no US-style jury trials for civil proceedings in Japan, although witness examinations are conducted as part of the procedure for intensive hearings. However, it is not rare for the court to decide on the case without conducting witness examinations.
Claims are also often settled in court, and the court may induce the parties to settle anytime during the legal proceedings.
Settlement can be reached out of court as well. In this case, the settlement agreement often includes a clause which obliges the plaintiff to withdraw the litigation, and the claim is then disposed by the plaintiff’s withdrawal.
A claim can be disposed of without a full trial if the Court considers that the defendant has not been validly served or that the claimant is inadmissible or if the Court considers it does not have jurisdiction.
According to Article 124 of the CPL, courts in China may dispose the cases without a trial if: (1) the case is identified as an administrative lawsuit and the civil procedure rules shall not apply; (2) both parties to a lawsuit have entered into a written arbitration agreement; (3) the dispute should be handled by other authorities such as social security authorities; (4) the case does not fall under the jurisdiction of the court which the plaintiff claims to; (5) there is effective judgment, ruling or settlement agreement over the case, and the litigant of that case files a lawsuit again; (6) the plaintiff files a lawsuit within the period for which filing of lawsuit is prohibited.
Apart from the above circumstances, there is a special procedure under CPL named “Order of Payment”. An Order of Payment applies when a creditor requests for payment of money by a debtor. As a pre-condition for this special procedure to apply, there shall be no other disputes on merits between the parties and the Order of Payment can be served on the debtor directly by the court without going to trial.
The defendant can raise, by way of motions several defences in order to obtain the dismissal of a claim before the full trial:
- Claimant’s failure to pay the requisite stamp fee (judicial fee);
- Claimant’s failure to prove that it has duly empowered the signatory of the statement of claim to start the legal action;
- The same claim has been already irrevocably settled by a court of law (res judicata authority);
- Claimant’s failure to comply with the limitation period;
- Lack of general jurisdiction of the courts to adjudicate the matter, or lack of jurisdiction of the Romanian courts (in international litigation) to adjudicate a specific claim.
A claim may be disposed of without a full trial in a variety of circumstances.
Judgment in default may be issued if the defendant fails to file a memorandum of appearance or fails to file a defence within the period prescribed by the Civil Procedure Rules (which is frequently extended by the court).
Except in cases where proceedings are initiated by filing a generally indorsed writ of summons, the plaintiff may apply for summary judgment on the basis of an affidavit made by himself, or by any other person who can swear positively to the facts, verifying the cause of action, and the amount claimed (if any), and stating that in his/her belief there is no defence to the action. The court will grant a summary judgment if it is satisfied that the defendant has no arguable defence and that there are is no other reason for permitting the case to go to trial.
Furthermore, the court may strike out a claim or defence which has no real prospect of success, or is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious or may prejudice embarrass or delay the fair trial of the action or is otherwise an abuse of the process of the court.
In cases where the determination of a point of law raised by the pleadings is likely to effectively determine the outcome of the proceedings, the court may determine the point of law as a preliminary issue and proceed to dismiss the claim or make such other order as may be just.
Finally, a claim may be dismissed if the plaintiff fails to file a Statement of Claim within the period prescribed by the Civil Procedure Rules (which is frequently extended by the courts) or deliberately and unjustifiably fails to comply with any order of the court (e.g. an order for discovery of documents).
Generally, the Cypriot courts use the powers enabling them to dispose of proceedings without a full trial very sparingly.
If so requested by the defendant, certain questions can be carved-out for the courts to decide upon separately without a full trial, including formal objections regarding choice of venue, the question of the right plaintiff etc. If the defendant succeed in such an objection, this can lead to the claim being dismissed without a full trial on the merits.
If the plaintiff fails to attend a hearing or submit certain pleadings, the court can also dismiss the case without further proceedings or trial, i.e. there will be no judgment. If, however, the defendant has made a counterclaim at a court hearing at which the plaintiff was represented or in a written pleading served on the plaintiff, the case will continue in respect of the counterclaim if so requested by the defendant. The plaintiff may resubmit the claim if it is not time-barred or not possible due to any other reason.
If the defendant fails to attend a hearing or submit certain pleadings, the court will enter a default judgment in favour of the plaintiff to the extent that the plaintiff's claim is found to be justified on the basis of the statement of claim and any other information available to the court. The party against whom the default judgment has been given may within a short time limit, typically four weeks after the judgment, demand the case to be reopened.
Generally, disputed claims are only resolved through a trial (usually there is more than one hearing), but in some cases the parties may amicably resolve the dispute through reconciliation. The parties may decide to reconcile during the litigation procedure and the claims may be disposed without a full trail.
Further, summary judgment for dismissal is very rare, and only available if the plaintiff fails to submit any evidence. If the claimant fails to attend any hearing, in practice, the case is struck out. However, the case can be renewed within 60 days. If the case is struck out again, it will be deemed to be null and void from the beginning.
The Commercial Procedural Code provides for two types of procedures, which do not suppose a full trial: summary proceedings (uproschennoye proizvodstvo) and writ proceedings (prikaznoye proizvodstvo).
Summary proceedings are inter-partes proceedings which are conducted solely on documents without a hearing. They are available for claims not exceeding RUB 500 000.
Writ proceedings are ex-parte proceedings – the court issues a writ of execution within 10 days after receipt of a claimant’s application and then notifies a debtor. If the debtor files its objections, the writ of execution should be cancelled, and the claimant may initiate ordinary proceedings. Writ proceedings are available for claims not exceeding RUB 400 000.
Claims can be disposed of without a full trial in several cases, but generally for the following:
a) If the plaintiff does not comply with the requirements of its complaint, even after being warned by the judge to emend the complaint for deficiencies or errors in it (for example, to clarify the names or addresses of the defendants, to exhibit certain documents, to clarify certain facts, etc.)
b) If the Judge orders his Court lacks jurisdiction.
c) If the complaint needs a previous ruling on a different matter before moving forward.
d) If the claim is necessarily related to another claim before a different court.
e) Lack of standing of the Plaintiff.
f) Lack of compliance of the conditions that the claims are subject to.
g) Filing in inappropriately.
A full trial can be avoided if the parties settle the case amicably during the proceedings, which is often the case in German litigation because judges are required to promote the parties’ efforts to reach a settlement agreement. Sec. 278 (6) ZPO even obliges the judge to schedule a “conciliation hearing” (Güteverhandlung) before the oral hearing starts. Furthermore, German procedural law provides for a number of special proceedings that allow the courts and the parties to dispose of claims without a full trial:
- The plaintiff may initiate a warning procedure for an order for payment (Mahnverfahren). If the debtor does not object to the court’s order within two weeks after service, the order is enforceable. If the debtor raises an objection, upon request of the plaintiff, the matter is referred to the competent court which continues to manage the case in accordance with the general rules (sec. 688 et seq. ZPO).
- The plaintiff can also apply for a provisional judgment (Vorbehaltsurteil) in a documentary process (Urkundsprozess) pursuant to sec. 592 et seq. ZPO, which is available in cases where the claim can be demonstrated and proven based solely on documentary evidence. Objections by the defendant in a documentary process are admissible only if they are supported by documentary evidence. Other means of evidence can be introduced only in the second stage of the proceedings (Nachverfahren).
- Furthermore, the plaintiff can also apply for a judgment by default (Versäumnisurteil) if the defendant does not appear at the oral hearing or does not notify its willingness to defend itself in writing prior to the oral hearing (sec. 331 et seq. ZPO).
Claims may be disposed of without going through a full trial in various circumstances.
First, either party may apply for a summary judgment under Order 14 of the Rules of the High Court (Cap. 4A). In proceedings commenced by a writ, after the plaintiff serves its statement of claim and the defendant provides notice of its intention to defend, the plaintiff may apply for summary judgment by summons supported by an affidavit arguing that the defendant has no real defence (except as to the amount of damages) to the claim or part of the claim. To oppose the application, the defendant should file an affidavit to show cause. On hearing the plaintiff’s application, the court may either:
- dismiss the application;
- grant a summary judgment if the issues raised by the defendant are ‘inherently unbelievable’ or ‘practically moonshine’; or
- grant the defendant a leave to defend, with or without conditions, if the defendant is able to satisfy the court that there is a triable issue, or that for some other reason there ought to be a trial.
Second, the court may, by its own initiative or on a party’s application, strike out the pleading if it:
- discloses no reasonable cause of action or defence;
- is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious;
- may prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair trial of the action; or
- is otherwise an abuse of the process of the court.
If a party is to apply for a strike out, it must do so before the close of the pleadings. Accordingly, the proceedings may be suspended or dismissed, and judgment is entered on that basis.
Third, Order 14A of Cap 4A provides a mechanism to dispose of a case on a point of law or construction of any document upon the court’s own motion or a party’s application, if such determination will finally determine the entire cause. Upon such determination the court may dismiss the cause or make such order or judgment as it thinks just.
Fourth, a default judgment may be granted at an early stage of the proceedings if the defendant fails to give notice of its intention to defend or fails to serve a defence within the prescribed time limit.
Finally, an action may be dismissed due to a party’s failure to comply with the rules or order of the court or a party’s conduct that amounts to an abuse of process or makes a fair trial impossible.
Parties to litigation can in appropriate circumstances apply to court for summary judgment or to have a claim or part of that claim struck out. Rules 18 to 24 of the RCCR govern the process for obtaining summary judgment. The Royal Court will consider whether the claimant or defendant has any real prospect of success, and if there are other compelling reasons why the claim should be disposed of at trial.
Rule 52 of the RCCR permits a party to make an application to strike out the whole or part of a party’s case on the basis that the pleading (or part thereof) discloses no reasonable grounds, is an abuse of process, for want of prosecution or where the party has failed to comply with a court order, rule or practice direction.
Under Order XXXVII of the Code, summary proceedings may be initiated by the plaintiff for suits concerning monetary claims upon negotiable instruments, recovery of debt, etc.
In respect of commercial disputes of a specified value, Order XIIIA of the Code (as inserted by the Commercial Courts Act) states that a party may file an application for summary judgment any time after summons has been served on the defendant but before the Court has framed issues in respect of the suit. However, it is also provided that such an application cannot be made if a suit in respect of any commercial dispute has been originally filed as a summary suit under Order XXXVII of the Code. It is further provided that the court may give a summary judgment against a plaintiff or defendant on a claim if it considers that:
a) the plaintiff has no real prospect of succeeding in the claim or the defendant has no real prospect of successfully defending the claim; and
b) there is no other compelling reason why the claim should not be disposed of before recording oral evidence.
Further, as per Order XVA of the Code (as inserted by the Commercial Courts Act), the court may also, in a case management hearing, dismiss or give judgment on a claim after a decision on a preliminary issue.
Additionally, the plaint filed by the plaintiff may also be returned/rejected at the initial stage under the provisions of Order VII Rule 10 (return of plaint) and Order VII Rule 11 (rejection of plaint).
In arbitration proceedings, Section 29B provides that the parties to arbitration agreement may agree to have their disputes resolved by the fast track procedure, wherein the dispute may be decided solely on the basis of written pleadings, documents and submissions filed by the parties without any oral hearing.
Isle of Man
There may be default judgment, summary judgment, strike out, stays, determination of preliminary issues which effectively dispose of the main proceedings, or the claim may settle.
According to the Italian Code of Civil Procedure, some claims can be settled without a full trial.
In particular, as provided by Article 633 et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure, at the request of the creditor of a determined sum of money (or of a certain quantity of fungible goods, or at the request of the person entitled to the delivery of a particular movable thing), the competent judge can issue – in general – an order to pay or deliver (in the form of a decree) if written evidence of the claimed right is provided. The decree becomes enforceable if the debtor does not challenge it within the term of 40 days from the service, thus starting ordinary proceedings. The decree is declared provisionally enforceable if the claim is based either on a credit instrument or on an act received from a notary public or another public official, as well as if there is a risk of serious prejudice due to the delay or if the debtor has recognized his debt in writing.
Moreover, Article 702 bis of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure provides for a summary trial, which can be started in cases where the court sits as a single judge and the taking of evidence process appears simple and swift to carry out. The judge provides in the most appropriate manner for the acquisition of the relevant means of proof, omitting any formality that is not essential to the proceedings.
If the pleadings of the parties are already sufficient to render judgment without the presentation of evidence, such as when there is no genuine factual issue, the court may render a judgment on the pleadings or a summary judgment.
If the questions raised are purely legal, the court may order the submission of position papers or legal memoranda and dispense with trial.
The court may also delegate the reception of evidence to a commissioner, who shall then file a report with the court. The commissioner’s report may be adopted, modified, or rejected by the court. When the parties stipulate that the commissioner’s factual findings shall be conclusive, only questions of law will be heard by the court.
The court may also approve a compromise agreement reached by the parties prior to trial as a result of an amicable settlement from the mediation or judicial dispute resolution conferences.
A claim may be disposed of without a full trial if the Court considers it as notoriously inadmissible or unfounded grounds or in circumstances where a procedural or legal court impediment is revealed.
In a different scenario, if the plaintiff does not follow the due course of the proceedings as demanded by law, the claim can also be disposed of without a full trial.
The court may issue a payment order or an European payment order if it is possible to make a decision on the basis of facts stated by the plaintiff, perceived by the court as uncontested, in particular if those facts are supported by documentary evidence. If so, the court will decide without a statement of the defendant and without scheduling a hearing.
Under RCCP, a claim may be also decided on by abridged decisions, i.e.:
- default judgment – if the plaintiff or defendant is procedurally passive in proceedings for fulfilment of obligation and the conditions under RCCP have been met;
- judgment on acknowledgment of claim – if the defendant entirely or partially acknowledges the raised claim; and
- judgment on waiver of claim – if the plaintiff entirely or partially waives his/her raised claim.
We also have a partial judgment used by the court to decide on any of several claims raised or on a part of a claim raised, provided that the claim has become uncontested in the course of the proceedings, and an interim judgment used by the court to decide on the basis or reason of a raised claim.
If the court does not decide on the merits, it issues a resolution.
The most notable situations are the following:
- The case is res judicata or subject to lis pendens.
- The court lacks jurisdiction to try the case.
- The court issues a default award.
The court must, on its own motion, consider whether the case is res judicata or subject to lis pendens as soon as any reason for that arises. A party can also raise an objection in this respect at any time during the proceedings. As regards a lack of jurisdiction, the court must consider whether it has jurisdiction on its own motion only in cases where another court may have exclusive jurisdiction. In all other cases (for example, when the underlying contract contains an arbitration clause), a party must assert that the court lacks jurisdiction. A party who wishes to raise this objection must do so the first time it is to respond. If a party has a legal excuse for not raising the objection on time, the party must present it as soon as possible after the excuse has ceased to exist. A party who fails to object within this time limit loses its right to object.
If a party has made an objection, the court must issue a separate decision thereon as soon as possible. If the court is contemplating dismissing the case based on the objection raised, the other party is always invited to reply to the objection. Both parties are also invited to submit statements if the court is contemplating dismissing the case on its own motion.
The court can also render a default judgment if the defendant does not submit its statement of defence within the time limit set by the court, provided that the summons has been served on the defendant (see question 8 above). Further, if the parties agree on a settlement they may at any time during the proceedings also request the court to issue a consent award, which then becomes enforceable.
The English court has extensive powers of case management that enable it to actively manage the proceedings. Broadly, there are three types of applications that can be made to dispose of claims without a full trial. First, the court can give a summary judgment against a claimant or defendant where it considers that they have no real prospect of success and where there is no other reason the case should go to trial. “Real prospect” is quite a low threshold in practice and has been interpreted to mean that the party’s prospect of success is not fanciful. Second, the court may strike out a statement of case if it appears
- that the statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing or defending the claim;
- that the statement of case is an abuse of the court’s process or is otherwise likely to obstruct the just disposal of the proceedings; or
- that there has been a failure to comply with a rule, practice direction or court order. Third, in some circumstances, the court can give a default judgment when a defendant has not filed an acknowledgment of service of a defence within the time limits prescribed by the CPRs.
The case may be disposed without a full trial in case of the settlement between the parties whether outside the court, whereby the settlement deed may be submitted for ratification, or before it whereby the settlement will be minuted in the court hearing minutes.
Another situation of disposing the claim without a full trail is the lapse of 60 days after striking off the case due to the failure of the parties to attend the scheduled hearing or the request of the defendant to strike it after the failure of the plaintiff to attend.
If the complaint is affected by an evident fault (i.e., time-barred), the defendant submits the motion on time and the court chooses not to defer discussing the demurrer jointly with the merits, then the matter can be rejected without a full trial. To the contrary, if the plaintiff has a solid case, it is inevitable to conduct a full trial for that there is no reduced trial.
In a civil proceeding, a case may be disposed of without a full trial if the parties reach a settlement and concludes a deed of settlement prior to the issuance of the court’s decision.
- There is no defence to the claim or that there is no issues to be tried. In such circumstance, the Plaintiff may apply to court for a summary judgement [See Order 14 of the Rules of Court 2012 (“ROC”)];
- The case involves questions of law or construction. In such circumstance, either party may apply to Court for disposal of case on point of law or tried of preliminary issue [See Order 14A and Order 33 rule 2 of the ROC];
- The claims are obviously unsustainable pursuant to Order 18 Rule 19 of the ROC. In such circumstances, both Plaintiff and Defendant may apply to strike out any pleadings filed in Court.
- The Defendant has failed to enter into appearance upon receipt of writ or has failed to file a statement of defence. In such circumstances, the Plaintiff may apply to enter into a judgement in default against the Defendant [See Order 13 and Order 19 of the ROC].
The elements under Order 18 Rule 19 of the ROC are:-
i. When it discloses no reasonable cause of action or defence;
ii. It is scandalous, frivolous and vexatious;
iii. It may prejudice. embarrass or delay the fair trial of action;
iv. It is an abuse of court process.
There are several mechanisms that allow the end of a trial without the existence of a final judgement.
In fact, the termination can be produced, firstly, by a unilateral act of the complaining party, through which it can withdraw from its action (before service of process). After notification of the complaint the plaintiff can “desist of demand". Here the court's needs to accept it and there are times in which the court will reject it and the trial will continue. Actually, the defendant can oppose to the unilateral termination.
If desist of complaint is accepted by the court the decision forbids the same party from bringing the same action against the same party.
In addition, litigants can, in common agreement, put an end to an ongoing trial. This may occur within the trial, through an agreement reached at the mandatory “settlement talks”, or out of court, by holding a settlement agreement to be submitted to the respective court to terminate the proceedings.
Where the demand is solely for the recovery of a debt, certain, liquidated and due, and not consisting in the performance of an act; or for the eviction of any person from any urban or rural tenement, with or without a claim for ground rent, rent or any other consideration due or by way of damages for any compensation, up to the date of the surrender of the tenement, it shall be lawful for the plaintiff to request in the sworn application that the court gives judgment allowing his demand, without proceeding to trial. In so doing, the plaintiff shall state in his declaration that in his belief there is no defence to the action.
Court proceedings may be terminated without review of the merits in cases where certain procedural requirements (such as the jurisdiction of the court or the advance payment of court costs) are not met.
Moreover, court proceedings are terminated without a review of the merits if the plaintiff with-draws its claim, if the defendant acknowledges the claim or if the parties enter into a settlement agreement with regard to the pending proceedings. Pursuant to the CCP, the termination of court proceedings in these cases has in principle res iudicata effect preventing the plaintiff from filing an action on the same subject matter against the same counterparty in the future.
Finally, court proceedings are written off if the legal action becomes moot (for example if the object in dispute is destroyed definitively or if the defendant satisfies the requested claim in the course of the proceedings).
In the Greek system of procedural law the courts cannot dispose off a claim without a full trial.
There are several ways in which a case may be disposed of without a full trial. There are various procedural impediments that can lead to a disposal that the court examines ex officio, e.g. whether it has jurisdiction and whether the plaintiff has a legal interest in the claim. Furthermore, a case can be disposed without a full trial if the parties reach a settlement, if the defendant concedes the claim, if the claim is manifestly unfounded or if the defendant is absent from the main hearing and the plaintiff has applied for a judgment in default. In the latter case, the judgment shall be based on the grounds for the claimant’s claim for relief, provided that the defendant has been notified of these and they do not appear to be clearly incorrect.
Under Luxembourg law, a case cannot be judicially solved without a full trial, although the trial might be limited to admissibility issues only.
However, once proceedings have been introduced, the parties can always settle the lawsuit.
The parties may require that the agreement they have reached remains confidential. A confidentiality clause should then be included in the agreement. In the absence of a confidentiality clause, the parties may freely use the agreement in support of a legal claim.
In theory, it is not necessary to enforce the settlement agreement since an applicant will only request the discontinuance of the proceedings if the settlement agreement concluded between the parties has been fully executed. The judge may also order measures to ensure the proper enforcement of the settlement agreement.
A settlement agreement can be cancelled in a number of cases. It may be cancelled in the event of fraud or violence, or in the event that the settlement is based on documents that have been found to be forged.
Courts may dismiss an action without a full trial pursuant to motion practice. For example, a defendant can make a motion on the pleadings seeking to dismiss for failure to plead a claim adequately in the complaint, or for a procedural defect. Additionally any party can move for summary judgment, arguing that there are no material facts in dispute such that the court may dismiss the action as a matter of law. As a general matter, motions to dismiss occur early in the case, often before discovery has taken place. Motions for summary judgment tend to be made after discovery is completed.
In addition, courts may dismiss an action without a motion under the following circumstances: (1) where the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the claims, (2) for failure to prosecute, including situations where there is a lengthy period of inactivity in a case or where the plaintiff is unprepared for trial or refuses to proceed with trial; and (3) for failure to comply with a court order or rule, including scenarios where there are repeated failures to appear at hearings and depositions.
Other than on procedural grounds, civil disputes may not be disposed of without a trial.
A defendant may, in the first hearing session, raise procedural objections (eg, lack of jurisdiction, illegitimacy of the claim, res judicata, or parallel proceedings). Court must first decide on any procedural objections raised by the defendant; and only if such objections are not accepted, the court may move to consider the merits of the case.
It is not possible to apply for a substantive (partial) ruling prior to the actual proceedings. It is, however, possible to request the court, via an appearance of the parties (which can be ordered at every stage of the proceedings, sections 87 and 88 DCCP) or by a procedural motion, to first render a decision regarding preliminary issues such as the period of prescription, the competence of the court or applicable law. This may result into a premature end of the proceedings or the continuing of subproceedings.
In principle, the scope of the dispute is determined by the parties. However, there is an increasing degree of case management by judges, on the grounds of efficiency and to explore whether, e.g. with the aid of an out-of-court settlement, the parties can be dissuaded from continuing legal proceedings.
Furthermore, the court may dismiss claims, without a full trial, if it appears that the statement of claim discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim (gebrek aan belang, section 3:303 DCC) or is an abuse of procedural law (misbruik van procesrecht, section 3:13 DCC). In some circumstances, the court can give a default judgment when a defendant does not appear for defence in the proceedings (verstekvonnis, section 139 DCCP).
A process may be terminated early through settlement, waiver by the plaintiff, full admission by the defendant of the claims, or abandonment of process by one of the parties. In this latter case, abandonment occurs when eighty days elapse with no procedural activity by all parties. However, a process is also terminated if the defendant has raised previous defenses that are accepted by the judge at a hearing, similar to a summary judgment in common law jurisdictions.
There are several instances in which a claim can be closed without a full trial. If the parties reach a settlement, then the claim will be closed. Having said that, settlements can be recorded in the official minutes of hearing in which case the settlement can have the weight of an executive deed. This means that if one of the parties breaches the settlement, the other party may proceed directly to execution.
There are other instances in which the court may close a case without a full trial such as the failure of both parties to attend a court hearing, or the failure of the plaintiff to attend and the defendant requests the court to strike out the case.
If the action remains struck out for 60 days and neither party seeks continuation, it will be deemed a nullity but all rights will be preserved.
There can be two situations where a claim may be disposed of without a full trial, first of which is the mechanism of accelerated trial, that can be used only in the following cases
- the claim is filed to credit sum of money not exciding 50,000 AMD;
- the claim is based on a written contract, and the respondent does not question its validity;
- parties participating in the proceedings have informed in written them not participating at the proceedings;
- parties participating in the proceedings have consented in writing on the accelerated trial of the case;
- facts important to resolve the dispute are indisputable, and the court is only required to determine the questions of law, or the respondent has accepted the claim.
The second concerns the issue of an injunction of payment by the change if the monetary claims is determined by the agreement of the parties or can be accurately determined by the law or the contract concluded by the parties. If the defendant objects the payment order, the claim is to be heard in regular proceedings.