HUNGARY Law and Practice Contributed by: István Varga and Viktor Előd Cserép, PROVARIS Varga & Partners
ing party to provide documents that the latter party is obliged to produce in accordance with the relevant substantive law provisions. Such a disclosure obligation exists when the docu- ment in question has been issued in the inter- est of the party seeking their disclosure and in the case of documents proving a legal relation- ship of said party. Such documents include, for example, performance certificates or documents that need to be issued by the sender so that goods can be transported. See 5.2 Discovery and Third Parties with respect to documents to be produced by third parties. Witnesses heard in a hearing shall also make available any relevant (parts of) documents in their possession for inspection. The court may include copies thereof in the case file. Although intervenors do not participate in the proceedings as parties, they may be heard as witnesses, in which case they may be ordered to show docu- ments in their possession for inspection. 5.4 Alternatives to Discovery Mechanisms Preliminary Taking of Evidence Exceptionally, upon a party’s motion, the com- petent district court may order the taking of evidence even before a lawsuit is brought, pro- vided that the taking of evidence at a later stage would be unsuccessful or excessively difficult, the taking of evidence in a preliminary manner would help prevent a lawsuit or close it within reasonable time, or a provision of law allows the preliminary taking of evidence. The general rules on the taking of evidence shall apply. “Emergencies” in Making Statements of Fact and Adducing Evidence: Adverse Inferences The Hungarian Code of Civil Procedure specifi- cally deals with the so-called “emergency” situ- ations when (i) a party does not have the nec-
essary information to make a specified factual statement (“emergency of statement”), or (ii) can make a factual statement but does not have the information it needs to be able to make an evi - dentiary motion (“emergency of evidence”). In these scenarios, invitations may be addressed to the opposing party to provide the necessary information. If the opposing party does not do so, the court may draw adverse inferences. If the party incapable of making a factual state- ment substantiates that it has taken the neces- sary steps to obtain the information in ques- tion, said information is in the possession of the opposing party and the latter does not provide it despite the court’s order to do so, the court may deem the relevant statement true. If the party intending to make an evidentiary motion substantiates that it has taken the nec- essary steps to acquire the information it needs to be able to make its motion, said information is in the possession of the opposing party, the moving party cannot prove its factual statement but the opposing party can be expected to prove that the relevant fact does not exist, or the fact could not be proven because of the opposing party’s conduct, the court can deem the fact that the moving party intends to prove to be correct. 5.5 Legal Privilege The rules on attorney-client privilege are includ- ed in the Attorneys’ Act, and apply to external and in-house counsel as well. All facts, informa- tion and data that attorneys become aware of in the course of their work are privileged. Privileged information (including the relevant documents and data carriers) must be kept confidential. Attorneys must refuse to give testimony and pro- vide data in any proceedings before courts and authorities unless they have received permission
559 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook