MACAU SAR, CHINA Trends and Developments Contributed by: João Nuno Riquito, Bruno Almeida, Daniel de Senna Fernandes and Paulo Alves Teixeira, Riquito Advogados
Macau and Portugal’s Codes of Civil Procedure
changes and aligning with international best practices – all while carefully considering the specific needs of Macau’s legal system. These intertwined and often conflicting factors required a nuanced and strategic approach to the reform process. As mentioned above, since its approval in 1999, the CPC has only undergone three amend- ments, the first occurring shortly thereafter on 20 December 1999 with Law 9/1999, which outlines the framework of the Macau SAR’s legal system (in Portuguese, “ Lei de Bases do Ordenamento Jurídico ”, or LBOJ) and introduced changes to the admissibility of appeals, as well as a mecha- nism which allows the scope of an appeal to be expanded ex officio by the Court of Final Appeal for the purpose of standardising jurisprudence. The second amendment came in 2004 with Law 9/2004, which introduced adjustments to procedural acts, discovery and enforce- ment, and which, among other things, created a special form of proceedings for small claims (those below MOP500,000). Lastly, in 2019, Law 4/2019, which also amended the LBOJ, intro- duced some minor amendments to the CPC, in particular in connection to the intervention of a panel of three judges in the trials of some mat- ters. Despite these modifications, the CPC’s funda- mental structure and principles have remained largely unchanged. Unsurprisingly, the rapid pace of social and economic development in Macau and the advent of new technologies since its enactment, such as electronic communica- tion and information systems, have been paving the way for an upcoming fifth amendment, which would involve significant changes to the CPC while also introducing a more comprehensive and efficient legal framework.
While Macau has kept its localised version of the 1961 Portuguese Code of Civil Procedure mostly intact, a significant overhaul took place in Portugal in 2013. The reform aimed to mod- ernise the country’s judicial system by stream- lining processes and promoting speed. It also addressed longstanding criticisms, aligning the law with contemporary legal practices and societal demands. This overhaul differentiated the 2013 Portuguese Code of Civil Procedure (the “2013 PCPC”) from Macau’s CPC, creating notable distinctions between the two. In particu- lar, the Portuguese 2013 CPC: • emphasises streamlining procedures and reducing complexity, introducing more straightforward processes to enhance acces- sibility to the justice system; • promotes a more dynamic courtroom environ- ment with a greater emphasis on oral pro- ceedings; • empowers judges with greater case manage- ment responsibilities, allowing them to play a more active role in guiding proceedings; • places more emphasis on promoting alterna- tive dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms, reflecting a modern approach to conflict resolution; • integrates provisions for electronic filings and communications, aligning with technological advancements; • establishes stricter time limits for various stages of the proceedings, aiming to expedite the resolution of cases and reduce delays; • encourages the concentration of claims and defences, aiming to resolve disputes more efficiently by allowing multiple related claims to be bundled together; and • introduces changes in the provisions govern- ing appeals and reviews, including adjust-
868 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook