ARMENIA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Mesrop Manukyan, Maria Petrosyan, Grigor Grigoryan and Anahit Sargsyan, MB Legal
The overarching trend in Armenian dispute resolu- tion is the creation of a justice system that prioritises technical expertise, digital accessibility, and a pref- erence for alternative mechanisms. This evolution is not merely a legal shift but a central component of Armenia’s socio-economic strategy to attract high- value foreign direct investment and position itself as a modernised legal system in the region. The Systematic Digitalisation of Armenian Justice The primary trend defining the Armenian legal envi- ronment in 2026 is the transition to a mandatory and comprehensive electronic justice system. The Arme- nian legislature has established the Electronic System for Dispute Resolution (the “System”) as the primary infrastructure for the preparation, delivery, receipt and storage of electronic documents necessary for judicial proceedings. This System is no longer a peripheral tool but is the required platform for all “System users”, a category that now encompasses all legal entities, individual entrepreneurs, state and local government bodies, practising advocates, bankruptcy managers and licensed mediators. For these participants, the digital submission of lawsuits, evidence and proce- dural motions is a legal obligation. Physical, paper- based filings are becoming an exception reserved for specific natural persons who have not yet engaged with the digital platform. This digitalisation has introduced a strict new regime for procedural timelines and the service of process. Under the current Civil Procedure Code, a document is legally considered submitted to the court at the exact moment it is transmitted through the System. More significantly, the “receipt” of judicial acts and notifications is now automated; under Article 119.6 of the Civil Procedure Code, a judicial act, notice or document is considered legally received exactly three working days after it becomes accessible in the par- ticipant’s digital personal portal. This rule eliminates the historical delays and evidentiary disputes associ- ated with physical mail delivery and the “refusal to sign” tactics used by uncooperative respondents. The System automatically generates an electronic confir- mation of availability, which serves as the “start date” for all subsequent legal deadlines.
While the System is programmed to send SMS alerts to the mobile numbers provided by users, these alerts are considered courtesy notifications only. The legal burden remains entirely on the practitioner to moni- tor the portal consistently. This has introduced a new standard of digital vigilance, as the legal clock for filing an appeal or a response starts from this point of “deemed receipt”. This automated service mecha- nism places a high burden of “digital vigilance” on legal departments and advocates, as they are legally responsible for any adverse consequences arising from a failure to regularly check their digital notifica- tions. The transition to this digital framework is intend- ed to eliminate the logistical delays inherent in tradi- tional mail services and to uphold the constitutional right to a trial within a reasonable time. The obligation to monitor the portal is absolute, and the consequences of missing a digital notification are severe and often irreversible. • Forfeiture of appeal rights: because the legal clock starts from the point of “deemed receipt”, a party that fails to check the portal may find that their win- dow for challenging a verdict has already expired. Armenian courts do not generally recognise “tech- nical failure to check the portal” as a valid ground for the restoration of a missed deadline. • Loss of evidentiary rights: if a court issues an interim order to provide specific evidence and a party misses the notification, the court may pro- ceed to draw “adverse inferences” or decide the case based on the limited evidence available. • Default judgments: sustained non-participation fol- lowing digital notification allows the court to utilise simplified or accelerated procedures, resulting in a judgment that is immediately enforceable. The System also ensures unprecedented transpar- ency for litigants, as the entire “electronic case file” is accessible to all parties and their representatives in real-time. This includes not only the pleadings but all submitted evidence, expert reports and interim court orders. The judiciary has also integrated electronic digital signatures into the process, ensuring that every judicial act and party submission is properly authen- ticated and legally binding. While the digitalisation of justice is a global trend, the Armenian approach is
29 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook