The Latvian court system was established pursuant to the Constitution of Latvia dated 1920 and reinstated in 1993 as well as in accordance with the Law on Judicial Power effective since 1993.

The court system of the Republic of Latvia comprises district or city courts, regional courts and the Supreme Court. Since civil cases are heard before the first instance courts and each party has rights to appeal the judgment within the appeal procedure, the appellate instance resolves these cases anew. The functions of the first instance are carried out by the district or the city courts, but in some cases by the regional courts.

Namely, cases admissible before the regional court are those related to the disputes over ownership rights to the immovable property, claims exceeding LVL 150 000 or EUR 213 432; cases on the protection of patent rights, trademarks and geographical indications, cases on the insolvency and liquidation of credit institutions.

First instance courts resolve cases in the body of one judge. Recording of proceedings is done by the secretary of the court session. Cases are heard with both parties being present. The request on the mandatory presence of both parties is one of the main reasons for a case to be postponed several times due to which Latvian court system has become notorious. There exists an opinion that a trial may be delayed for an inexcusable period of time. Obviously, amendments and supplements to the Civil Procedure Law of Latvia (effective since January 1, 2003) have been introduced in order to eliminate the above defect. Probably one of the most remarkable changes is the Rule on Preliminary Sessions. Such a procedural stage is completely new in the civil procedure of Latvia.

Within the preliminary session the judge questions the parties about the essence of a case so that to define the subject matter and limits of the dispute, explains procedural rights and obligations as well as consequences of performance or a failure to perform procedural activities, decides upon participation of the state or municipal representatives and the prosecutor in the trials where the law provides for such a participation. The judge also explains on the settlement possibilities and, in case of necessity, determines a term for the particular procedural activities to be fulfilled. In the preliminary session the judge also appoints the date and time for the court session to be held and informs the present participants about it.

Since January 1, 2007 the Civil Procedure law provisions regarding presenting of evidences were supplemented by granting the potential claimant with the right to file application in the court to present evidences even before the action is brought to the court. Such application shall be reviewed within 10 days in a hearing where the potential parties of the case are invited. However, on urgent circumstances such application may be decided and satisfied also without presence of the parties and without calling a hearing. Such regulation allows examine witnesses, make expert examination or obtain other evidences according to the general civil procure norms before the claim is actually raised. If the applicant's request is satisfied to present evidences before the claim is raised, he/she is obliged to file claim in the court within a definite period of time that shall not exceed 30 days. If the claim is not filed within the due term, the court adopts decision to cancel the order of presenting evidences at the request of the potential claimant or defendant.

Responsibility of the trial participants is another crucial supplement to the Civil Procedure Law. If a participant of a case fails to submit explanations within the term set by the judge or does not respond to the judge's request, the judge may charge a penalty up to LVL 50,00. Likewise, if a participant of a case fails to appear at the preliminary session without a justifying reason, the judge may charge him/her the same penalty. Whereas, if the Defendant has not submitted explanations, has failed to appear at the preliminary session and has not duly informed the court about the cause of the absence, the court may make a judgment by default upon the request of the Plaintiff.

Next remarkable supplement to the Civil Procedure Law is the judgment by default. It is a judgment which upon the request of the Plaintiff is made by the first instance in the trials where the Defendant has failed to submit explanations regarding the claim and has not appeared at the session without justifying grounds. The court makes the judgment by default based on the explanations of the Plaintiff and the materials of the case if the court recognizes them to be sufficient for resolving the dispute. The judgment by default shall not be made in the trials which pursuant to the law shall not be resolved by the settlement, where the Defendant's place of residence or location is not in the Republic of Latvia, where the Defendant has been served summons through the publication in the official newspaper of the Republic of Latvia Latvijas Vēstnesis and where there are several Defendants in a trial and at least one of them takes part in the proceedings.

In compliance with the amendments to the Civil Procedure Law, the Defendant shall not appeal the judgment by default under the appeal procedure. The Defendant nonetheless is entitled to submit an application to initiate a new hearing of the case with the court that has made the above judgment within 20 days since the judgment by default has been made. The judge who has received the above application shall make a decision within 7 days as to whether to initiate a new hearing of the case, i.e. it shall be recognized that the hearing of the case without the presence of the Defendant and without the examination of its explanations has lead or could have lead to a wrongful judgment of the case, or to reject the application if it is recognized that a new hearing of the case lacks basis. The judgment by default becomes effective if the appeal claim (lodged by the Plaintiff in this case) and the application to initiate a new hearing of the case (lodged by the Defendant being absent at the court session) have not been filed within the term provided by the law. Provided that the above papers are not filed, the judgment by default enters into force after the term has expired to appeal the decision on the refusal to initiate a new hearing of the case.

Since December 14, 2006 the European Parliament and Council Directive 2004/48/EC dated April 29, 2004 is implemented in the Civil Procedure Law of the Republic of Latvia. It concerns application of intellectual property rights and supplements the law with Chapter on "Cases regarding infringement and protection of intellectual property rights". After introduction of these amendments a copyright subject may request the court apply temporary means of protection if there are grounds to claim that his rights are infringed or might be infringed.

With the first application of the new chapter provisions in practice, several gaps came out in the regulation set forth by the Civil Procedure Law due to the partial implementation of Directive 2004/48/EC regarding application of intellectual property rights. The Latvian Civil Procedure Law lacks more specific procedural regulation about the review procedure and making of a final decision in point of fact in the matters pertaining to application of temporary means of protection.

The Civil Procedure Law states that to decide a matter regarding application of temporary means of protection, the court hearing shall be convened obligatory and parties of the respective case shall be invited. Despite the fact that at the hearing parties have right to express their arguments and objections, the hearing is of a solely formal character and its purpose is to observe provisions laid down in the Civil Procedure Law. Arguments expressed by the parties during the hearing are not evaluated in point of fact, and the court adopts its ruling solely based on application filed by one of the parties that indicates to the breach of the principle of competition.

A request to apply temporary protection means may be filed and a respective decision to define such means may be adopted both before bringing action to the court and after the civil proceedings regarding infringement of copyrights are taken. According to the Civil Procedure Law it depends on the above described circumstances, first, whether a person against whom the decision is taken, will be compensated damage that may be incurred due to application of temporary means of protection on condition that it turns out that such application was ungrounded, and, second, whether a person who is claiming application of such temporary protection means shall prove their rights to the works which protection was claimed. Clarification of this issue is very essential because it will establish whether in general a person as a subject of rights is entitled to express request to apply temporary means of protection, or not.

If the request for application of temporary protection means is made before bringing action to the court, one shall observe the Civil Procedure Law provision according to which the potential claimant is under obligation to file evidences proving his intellectual property rights that are infringed as well as evidences that they are being infringed or might be infringed. Unfortunately, the Civil Procedure Law provisions regulating submission of application for temporary means of protection within pending proceedings are not obliging a person who is filing the respective application, to file evidences that would prove his intellectual property rights and this is very difficult to explain.

Any party under the appeal procedure may appeal judgments made with both parties present. The term for the appeal to be submitted begins at the moment when the court has issued the judgment (usually – within 2 weeks since the hearing of the case) and the above term is 20 days. If at the first instance the case was heard before a district or a city court, the appeal instance is the regional court; whereas if the regional court was the first instance, the Civil Case panel of the Supreme Court is the appeal instance.

The appeal instance hears cases in the body of three judges. Recording of proceedings is done by the secretary of the court session. The appeal instance resolves case within the limits the claim was filed unless the judgment is appealed only in some part. If the judgment is appealed only partially, the non-appealed part becomes effective after the term has expired for the appeal to be submitted, and consequently the appeal instance does not hear the case in that part.

Upon hearing the case, the appeal instance examines all evidences and listens to the explanations provided by the parties as well as to the testimonies of the parties if necessary. New evidences may be submitted to the appeal instance, nonetheless it should be indicated why they have not been submitted with the first instance earlier. Besides, if the cause for failing to submit evidences earlier is not recognized as justifying, the court may impose procedural penalty for the default to submit evidences duly.

The appeal instance judgment enters into force upon its announcement. Still the above judgment may be appealed under the cassation procedure in the Senate of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Latvia. The Senate does not examine the evidences established by the court anew, but decides only on points of law. If the Senate finds that the court has applied a wrong legal norm or has misinterpreted the applicable law, it may revoke the judgment and transfer it for a new hearing to the appeal instance or else (which is however a rare occasion) amend the judgment, if the misinterpretation of the law admitted by the appeal instance is self-evident.

The fact should be noted that the appeal rights of the participants do not refer to some important categories. In insolvency trials of companies and entrepreneurships that are heard before the regional court upon the request of a creditor or the insolvent company itself, the judgment pursuant to which a company or an entrepreneurship is declared to be insolvent, shall not be appealed.

The Senate hears cases under the cassation procedure if at the action session of the Senate it is decided that the case shall be appointed for hearing at the Senate. The Plaintiff and the Defendant are not invited to be present at the action session of the Senate. At the moment more than a half of the judgments appealed under the cassation procedure are dismissed already at the action session of the Senate.

Pursuant to the cassation procedure, at least three senators shall hear the case with the Plaintiff and the Defendant being invited to the session. Nevertheless the absence of the Plaintiff or the Defendant is not an obstacle for the case to be heard at the cassation instance. If the Senate considers a case to be complicated, it makes a decision to hear the case in an extended body of senators. In such circumstances the number of the senators participating at the hearing may be up to seven. Upon appointing the case before the Senate, it may adopt decision to arrest the execution of the appellate instance judgement that has already entered into force, until the hearing of the case before the Senate.

Judgments that have not been appealed as well as those which pursuant to the law shall not be appealed, may be heard at the Senate of the Supreme Court upon the protest of the Attorney General of the Republic of Latvia as well as upon that of the Head of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Latvia or his/her deputy. The above officials may lodge such a protest also based on the application of a trail participant if material violations have been pointed out. Effective judgments may be reviewed also based on the application about the newly found evidences.

Essential changes have also occurred within the sphere of the judgment execution. On January 1, 2003 the Law on Bailiffs entered into force that changed the status of a bailiff in principal. Within the former court system bailiffs acted as a part of the respective court. They received comparatively small remuneration set by the state and often complaints were lodged about their activities. Now in accordance with the above law, the activities of the bailiffs are organized as a private practice – similarly to the activities of attorneys and public notaries in Latvia.

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia functions pursuant to the law dated June 5, 1996. It has been effective since June 28, 1996.

The Constitutional Court examines the compliance of legislative acts with the Constitution and with the other laws of the Republic of Latvia. The basis for a case to be heard before the Constitutional Court may be an application by the officials set out in the Law on Institutions of the Republic of Latvia. In some instances it may be an application by physical or legal entities if their interests have been involved pursuant to the court judgment by applying a legal norm that is considered to be anti-constitutional at the opinion of the applicant.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.