TOP LEGAL EXECUTIVES
A Tale of two Courts
By Zsófia Végh
Hungary, in common with most states, has a judicial system where cases rise up through a pyramid, mostly starting in a district court and, if it gets that far, ending in an appeal to the Kúria (the Curia or Supreme Court) at the very top. The country also has a Constitutional Court, which ensures the country’s legislation is in keeping with the Fundamental Law, the formal name for the constitution. This article looks at how these two courts operate and, briefly, at areas of overlap.
The Curia Since 2011, numerous changes have transformed the structure of the Hungarian court system. Currently, there are 158 courts in a four-tier hierarchy: district courts, administrative and labor courts, regional courts, regional courts of appeal and the Curia, or Supreme Court, at the top of the pyramid. There are a total of 113 district courts. Appeals against decisions reached at these courts are heard by 20 appeal courts, which in certain cases act as the court of first
THE HISTORY OF THE CURIA As with so much else at Hungary’s rebirth as a free and democratic state, the Curia underwent major reforms from 1989 onwards, but its history long predates that point. The Curia at the time of the regime change was built upon an institution that was in place (albeit working under a very different constitution and legal system) from 1948, when the communists set up their single party state. But a line can be traced back beyond that, to Article 2 of Act LIX of 1881, which merged two departments (known as “royal tables”) into one body as from January 1, 1882: “With regard to the jurisdiction of both royal tables, the highest judicial authority is hereby vested in the Royal Hungarian Curia in Budapest.” Even that name was not new, though. Act LIV of 1868 declared that “the highest legal authority as regards the whole jurisdiction of the two royal courts of appeal
instance. The Curia is the highest judicial authority of Hungary. It guarantees the uniform application of law, as its decisions are binding for other courts. The responsibilities of the Supreme Court are varied, ranging from the examination of appeals submitted against the decisions of county courts and regional courts of appeal, to the review of final decisions if these are challenged through an extraordinary remedy. The Curia adopts so-called “uniformity decisions,” which are binding on all other courts. It hears and determines uniformity complaints, and analyses final
would rest with the highest court under the name ‘Royal Hungarian Curia’ located in Pest.” As the Curia’s fascinating (if somewhat clunky) English language history section (lb.hu/en/history-and-judicial-reform) makes clear, the antecedents go back even further yet. “Based on the development of law of earlier centuries, Act XXV regulated the position of the Royal Court of Appeal led by the Chief Judicial Representative, which had its first session on May 2, 1724. The Curia, made up of two forums, the Table of Seven and the Royal Table (or the Royal Court of Appeal), was turned into a permanent court working in Pest independently of the royal court, though it did not meet regularly until the reign of Joseph II,” it says. Continue back beyond that and the history becomes hazier as it grows older, but the website makes a brave effort at establishing a link with the country’s King-Saint founder, István (Stephen). “With his codes the king – as the prominent person of supreme jurisdiction – laid down the foundations of a thousand-year-old development of the legal system.”
22
