The difficulties of judicial activity in view of the general suspension of deadlines

March 22, 2021

2 min read

The state of emergence, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, lead to the approval of a legal regime that established a general rule for the suspension of deadlines and proceedings.

This means that it is more difficult to carry out acts in non-urgent processes and procedures pending in the courts, and the terms that regulate the practice of such acts do not start or run while this measure lasts. It should be noted, however, that there are exceptions - we highlight the following:

• Appeals - The deadlines for filing appeals, pleading for nullities, or reforming decisions, continue to run. This means that in a process in which it is not foreseen any further development, and a final decision has been made, the judge will issue the final sentence, with the deadline for appeals starting from the moment all involved parties are notified of said sentence.

• **Agreement of the parties **- In regards to the holding of diligences and the practice of non-urgent acts, an exception is made for its practice through online platforms, requiring the parties to accept it and expressly declare that they have the conditions to do so.

Proceedings, acts and diligences considered urgent continue to be processed, if Health Autority’s guidelines and recommendations are fulfilled or if they are carried virtually, i.e, using online platforms.

In the case of executive proceedings, all acts are suspended, including court diligences and judicial delivery of a family home or delivery of the leased property. Exceptions are also made, allowing payments to the creditor through the proceeds from the sale of pledged assets and acts that cause serious damage to creditor subsistence or whose realization causes irreparable damage to him, despite the necessary judicial order.

These measures pose challenges. And the general wording may lead to restrictive interpretations and paralyzing the proceedings, beyond what we believe it was the main propose of this regime – protecting rights and to create conditions to keep the social distance while the access to justice is ensured.

The regime in force constitutes an obstacle to citizens' access to justice, making it difficult to file actions, exercise rights and even to consult cases in court.

This suspension can also lead to future difficulties, as a large volume of actions are expected to take place as soon as the measures end, which will obviously overburden the judicial system, leading to the inevitable delays in carrying out diligences and decisions.

On the other hand, the practice of acts through online platforms, namely in the case of trial hearings, mitigate institutional heaviness of courts, and may offer less guarantees in terms of the proximity to evidence and pursuit for material truth, considering the distance between witnesses, judges and lawyers.

In conclusion, we will say that this suspension of deadlines and procedural acts, despite the set-out exceptions, will delay the processing and regular progress of legal proceedings. And when the suspension regime is lifted, there will invariably be delays. It is easy to stop everything at the same time, It will be much more challenging to start it all over again.

Catarina Candeias

Head of Secured Portfolios