LIECHTENSTEIN Law and Practice Contributed by: Moritz Blasy, Nicolai Binkert, Simon Ott and Kathrin Binder, Schurti Partners Attorneys at Law Ltd
of refusal, such as a lack of neutrality). Further- more, parties can challenge the impartiality of the expert. Strict rules apply as regards the neu- trality of experts. The mere impression of lacking neutrality may lead to a successful challenge of the appoint- ment of the expert. Usually, an expert produces a written expert report and the judge and the parties may then examine the expert on the sub- mitted written expert report in an oral hearing. While parties may also appoint private expert witnesses, party-appointed experts are con- sidered and heard as witnesses rather than as experts. 7.6 Extent to Which Hearings Are Open to the Public As a rule, court hearings in civil cases are open to the public. The court can exclude the public if public morality or public order so demand or if it is feared that the procedure would otherwise be disturbed. The court can also exclude the pub- lic from a hearing upon application of a party if facts about family life are to be discussed or established. Additionally, the court may exclude the public if business secrets would otherwise be jeopardised. Transcripts or written submissions in civil pro- ceedings are, in general, not open to the public. However, third parties may be granted access if all parties to the respective lawsuit agree or, in the absence of such an approval, if the third party shows a prima facie, legal interest. 7.7 Level of Intervention by a Judge The judge has the principal role of leading the proceedings. They control the proceedings and the timetable by opening, directing and closing the oral hearings. The judge may order the par-
ties to provide written statements or legal docu- ments, as well as take the lead in questioning the parties, witnesses and experts. It is for the judge to decide whether further evidence needs to be heard or whether the heard evidence is sufficient to establish the facts of the case and to render a decision. While the law prescribes that a judgment shall, if possible, be given orally immediately following the oral hearings, in practice, most judgments are given in writing after the oral hearings are terminated. 7.8 General Timeframes for Proceedings The Liechtenstein Civil Procedure Code stipu- lates several provisions that guarantee the expe- diency of civil proceedings. For example, parties are required to present facts and evidence at their earliest convenience in order to avoid the risk that such facts and evidence are precluded. The deadlines for procedural steps to be taken are mostly 14 days or four weeks, with such deadlines usually being stayed during the court holidays (from 15 July to 25 August and from 24 December to 6 January). The duration of proceedings largely depends on the complexity of the case. As a guide, pro- ceedings before the District Court usually take between six months and two years, and pro- ceedings before the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court usually take around six to 12 months for a decision to be handed down. However, if the appellate courts order the taking of further evidence due to procedural errors, or if the case is remitted to the District Court for further hearing, the proceedings will typically last considerably longer since any new decisions will again be subject to further appeal. The same
808 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook