These cookies cannot be disabled. They are essential for core functionality in ebrd.com to ensure a seamless and secure experience.
Overview
Since the EBRD began its work on legal transition in the 1990s, the legal framework for doing business in our regions has improved substantially. Similarly, judiciaries have shown improvements in independence and understanding of the market economy, while new legal mechanisms in such areas as dispute resolution have emerged as well as best practices that are being applied in the EBRD's new regions. However, the enforcement of contracts and commercial laws continues to be problematic, which deters investors from participating in regions' markets for fear that their legal rights will not be protected. Digitalisation of courts and bailiff regimes, enabling participants to attend remotely, has also taken precedence, especially amid the Covid-19 pandemic. Such digitalisation increases transparency and reduces avoidable crowding at court facilities.
The LTP's role
The Legal Transition Programme (LTP) has recently devoted special attention to strengthening the enforcement of contracts and judicial capacity. The LTP runs wide-ranging commercial law judicial training projects in the economies EBRD invests in. These projects typically aim to train pools of local judges who then work with international experts to deliver fundamental training to all judges hearing commercial matters in the given country. In addition, the LTP also seeks to promote the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), through advising governments on the upgrading of arbitration laws in accordance with the model law of the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL); the training of arbitrators; establishing court-annexed mediation facilities and mediation centres; and the training of mediators. Furthermore, the LTP is also involved in reforms to court structure and jurisdiction. This typically entails advising governments or agencies on how specialised commercial courts or chambers can improve the handling of commercial matters in a given country. The LTP has also been actively engaged in promoting digitalisation of court systems in emerging economies where it operates. Being able to attend court proceedings remotely is considered and important step in facilitating legal procedures and bolstering transparency.
Areas of Expertise:
- Courts digital transformation and judicial capacity
- Alternative dispute resolution (commercial mediation)
- Enforcement regimes and enforcement officers (bailiffs)
- Dispute resolution assessments and standard setting
Alternative Dispute Resolution
The LTP seeks to promote the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Business and courts alike are assisted by the availability of effective ADR mechanisms. Evidence shows that commercial mediation and arbitration can provide faster, more tailored outcomes.
The LTP’s work on ADR has included advice to the government on the upgrading of arbitration laws in accordance with the UNCITRAL model law; the training of arbitrators; the training of judges on the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards; advice on the introduction /improvement of mediation laws; advice on providing incentives to mediate through pre-trial procedure; establishing court-annexed mediation facilities and mediation centres; and the training of mediators.
Enforcement Regimes and Agents
It is critical for private sector development that businesses have the confidence not only in their ability to protect their contractual and statutory rights in the courts, but also to recover judgment debt. Ineffective mechanisms to ensure compliance with court decisions have a corrosive effect on the investment climate and the rule of law.
Inefficiency in the enforcement of court judgments is a substantial problem affecting the justice systems in the EBRD regions. In an EBRD study of problems affecting commercial justice in the region, the implementation of decisions was identified as the most problematic area – worse even than the lack of impartiality in court decisions. In the most recent Business Environment and Enterprise Performance Survey (BEEPS) conducted by the EBRD and the World Bank, business respondents in all the economies EBRD invests in considered the ability of the justice system to enforce court judgments to be very low. A substantial minority of respondents to the BEEPS believed that decisions were ‘never’ enforced.
We have conducted a detailed regional analysis of the law and practice surrounding the enforcement of courts’ decisions, and have advised governments on reform of the relevant legislative framework, including on matters such as access to information on debtors’ assets, improved sale and auction procedures, the accrual of interest on judgment debt, and the role of the private sector in providing enforcement services. The LTP has also conducted training and capacity-building activities for bailiffs.
Court structures
A number of LTP’s projects have involved reforms to court structure and jurisdiction. This entails consideration of how specialised commercial courts or chambers can improve the handling of commercial matters. It also involves examining how courts can be unburdened of the responsibility for more routine, administrative matters which clog court lists and distract judges’ attention from substantive matters.
LTP projects have also provided support to government authorities to enhance the functioning of judicial training centres and other court supervisory bodies. Such work has been directed at institutional capacity-building, such as management and budget skills. These areas have proved to be critical components for the sustainability of projects, particularly in the EBRD’s Early Transition Regions.
Another important aspect of an effective court framework is the availability of easy access to court decisions. In many economies, judges and lawyers have difficulty in searching for and obtaining copies of judicial decisions. As a result, the case law lacks uniformity. Furthermore, the inscrutability of the jurisprudence frustrates the efforts of local and foreign investors to understand and manage legal risk. The LTP has advised governments on legal and practical measures to improve access to judicial decisions. This allows lawyers to present better quality arguments, and it allows judges to benefit from reasoning in analogous cases. It also promotes greater transparency in the justice sector.
Assessments and standard setting
Cross-Regional Assessment on readiness for online courts
In 2022-2023, the EBRD carried out an Assessment to evaluate the degree to which 17 EBRD economies in Eastern Europe and the Caucasus, Central Asia, South-eastern Europe, Southern and Eastern Mediterranean and Türkiye are ready to introduce, or have already developed, online courts for commercial disputes. The Assessment examines whether the key preconditions are in place for having comprehensive online court which includes various stages of the litigation. It was conducted within the EBRD Regional Framework Project on Digital Transformation of Courts – Development of Online Courts for Small Claims. It is our belief that online courts will revolutionise the delivery of justice, particularly for those who have limited access to it, such as small and medium-sized businesses.
Assessment of bailiffs and enforcement agents
In 2013, the EBRD started a comparative assessment of the effectiveness of bailiffs and enforcement agents in the CIS, together with Georgia and Mongolia. The assessment examined the regulation and supervision of enforcement agents; their effectiveness in searching for, seizing and selling assets of debtors; the costs and time frames associated with enforcement procedures; and the difficulties encountered in the enforcement against particular kinds of assets.
Judicial Decisions Assessments
In 2010 and 2011, the EBRD began a qualitative evaluation of judicial decisions in commercial law in the CIS, Georgia and Mongolia. The first phase of this evaluation covered Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, Mongolia, Russia, Tajikistan and Ukraine. The second phase covered Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. In 2012, a third phase was conducted in South East Europe, covering: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Kosovo, Montenegro, FYR Macedonia, Romania, Serbia and Slovenia.
Using a purposive sampling methodology to select typical decisions, the Judicial Decisions Assessment studied seven dimensions of judicial capacity, viewed primarily through the prism of the decisions, namely: predictability; quality of the written judgment; legislative impediments; speed; cost; implementation and impartiality. Local experts in each target country selected decisions and assessed the dimensions, after which all decisions and local evaluation data were passed to an expert panel for analysis.