Uniformity decisions

on the applicability of building and townscape regulations in the event of a change of use without construction activity

On the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by Panel No. K.VII of the Curia, the Curia's Uniformity Complaint Panel has issued the following uniformity decision on the applicability of building and townscape regulations in the event of a change of use without construction activity:
A change of use without building activity shall also require a townscape procedure; building and townscape regulations shall be prevailing; and statutory measures for townscape protection may be applied.
Panel No. K.VII of the Curia may depart from Decision No. Kfv.37.829/2020/7, which has been published in the Collection of Court Decisions.
The Curia’s Decision No. Kfv.37.829/2020/7, which has been published in the Collection of Court Decisions, may no longer be invoked as binding.
 

on the entitlement to severance pay of a military employee who died during his/her notice period

On the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by Panel No. K.VII of the Curia, the Curia’s Uniformity Complaint Panel has issued the following uniformity decision on the entitlement to severance pay of a military employee who died during his/her notice period

1. In the event of the termination of his/her legal relationship by discharge, the military employee shall acquire entitlement to severance pay when his/her notice period ends.
2. The Curia’s Adjudicating Panel No. K.VII may depart from Decisions No. Mfv.10.567/2012/4 and Mfv.10.097/2019/3, which have been published in the Collection of Court Decisions.
    

on deliberating on a petition filed in the interests of legality against the second-instance decision of a penitentiary judge and a high court pursuant to Section 51 (5) of Act CCXL of 2013 on the Enforcement of Sentences, Measures, Certain Coercive Measures, and Detention for Minor Offences

In uniformity proceedings conducted on the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by the Prosecutor General of Hungary, the Curia’s Uniformity Complaint Panel has issued the following uniformity decision: 
Pursuant to Section 51 (5) of Act CCXL of 2013 on the Enforcement of Sentences, Measures, Certain Coercive Measures and Detention for Minor Offences, when deliberating on a petition filed in the interests of legality against the second-instance decision of a penitentiary judge and a high court, it shall not be possible to deliver a decision as a consequence of which the defendant will or may end up in a more disadvantageous position.
 

on the examination of the opinion of a local land commission in administrative proceedings

On the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by Panel No. K.IV of the Curia, the Curia’s Uniformity Complaint Panel has issued the following uniformity decision on the examination of the opinion of a local land commission in administrative proceedings:

1. In a case specified by Section 27 (1) of Act CXXII of 2013 on Transactions in Agricultural and Forestry Land, an agricultural administrative body may issue a decision in the possession of the local land commission’s opinion issued in accordance with constitutional criteria and statutory provisions.
2. The agricultural administrative body shall be required to examine whether the opinion is supported by facts and data, and is reasoned, justified in detail, and free of contradictions.
3. If it finds that the opinion does not comply with constitutional criteria or statutory provisions, it may not alter or disregard it. It is obliged to contact the local land commission, where appropriate on several occasions, with the aim of making it issue a lawful opinion.
4. The Curia’s Adjudicative Panel No. K.IV may depart from the interpretation of the law contained in Decision No. Kfv.37.502/2022/7, which was published in the Collection of Court Decisions and may no longer be invoked as binding.

on the rights transferred to the assignee in connection with the enforcement of an assigned claim

On the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by the Curia’s Panel No. P.VI., the Curia’s Uniformity Complaint Panel has delivered the following uniformity decision on the rights transferred to the assignee in connection with the enforcement of an assigned claim: 
As a result of the assignment of claims in accordance with Sections 328 (1) and 329 (1) of Act IV of 1959 on the Civil Code, Section 6:193 (1) and (2) of Act V of 2013 on the Civil Code, and Section 6:193 (3) of the same Act in force until 23 June 2023 and from 24 June 2023, the rights to make legal declarations with the aim of enabling the court to apply the legal consequences of invalidity shall not be transferred to the assignee if the contract is invalid, the contract that underlies the claim assigned to the assignee.
 

on the payment of procedural fees and the reimbursement of publication costs in certain non-contentious civil proceedings launched ex officio

On the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by the Head of the Civil Chamber of the Curia, the Curia’s Uniformity Complaint Panel has delivered the following uniformity decision on the payment of procedural fees and the reimbursement of publication costs in certain non-contentious civil proceedings launched ex officio:

1. If the court orders liquidation ex officio on the notification (initiative) of the Company Registration Court pursuant to Section 22 (1) (c) of Act XLIX of 1991 on Bankruptcy and Liquidation Proceedings, there will not be any obligation on the subject of proceedings to pay fees and reimburse publication costs in non-contentious civil proceedings.
2. Pursuant to Section 119 (1b) and (5) of Act V of 2006 on Public Company Information, Company Registration and Winding-up Proceedings, the obligation to pay procedural fees and reimburse publication costs will not arise in a manner that burdens the subject of proceedings, in asset settlement proceedings launched ex officio, either.
    

on reopening in the case of partial acts that form part of a single offence

In uniformity proceedings conducted on the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling that was submitted by the Prosecutor General of Hungary, the Curia’s Uniformity Complain Panel has delivered the following uniformity decision on reopening in the case of partial acts that form part of a single offence: 
If those partial acts which form part of a single offence were determined in several final judgements, a reopening might be granted, at the expense of the accused, against the judgement that first became final in accordance with Section 637 (1) (a) (ab) of Act XC of 2017 on the Code of Criminal Procedure, and a reopening might be granted, in favour of the accused, against the subsequent judgement or subsequent judgements  pursuant to Section 637 (1) (b) of the same Act. 
A motion for reopening should be filed against each final judgement separately and each final judgement should be delivered separately.
A reopening based on Section 637 (1) (b) of Act XC of 2017 on the Code of Criminal Procedure may, if it is well-founded, lead only to the quashing of the final judgement and the termination of proceedings, which shall not prevent the enforcement of the criminal claim for the acts affected by the reopening that is ordered under Section 637(1) (a) (ab) of Act XC of 2017. In this case, the prosecutor does not initiate the court proceedings by filing an indictment, but by filing a motion for a reopening.
Any interpretation that goes against the Curia's decision No. Bfv.296/2022/19 may no longer be invoked as binding.
 

on departure from a decision that was issued in a model case and was not impugned by cassation

In uniformity proceedings conducted on the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by the Curia’s Panel No. K.V, the Curia’s Uniformity Complaint Panel has issued the following uniformity decision:

1.  The Curia is not bound by the decision of a lower court in the model case; that is, the Curia may depart from the judgement, which was delivered in the model case and was not impugned by cassation, in cassation proceedings aimed at examining the lawfulness of decisions delivered on the basis of the model case.
2. The Curia’s Adjudicating Panel No. K.V. may depart from the interpretation of the law set out in Section 48 of Judgement No. Kfv.37.471/2019/11, which was published in the Collection of Court Decisions, and decisions containing a similar interpretation of the law may no longer be invoked as binding.
    

on the total sentencing procedure

In uniformity proceedings conducted on the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by the Prosecutor General of Hungary, the Curia’s Uniformity Complaint Panel has issued the following uniformity decision:

The court must issue a single decision on a legally effective motion for the total sentencing procedure with respect to all custodial sentences contained therein, as follows

(a) if the necessary legal conditions are fulfilled, all custodial sentences specified in the motion must be included in the total sentencing procedure in full, or

(b) if the legal conditions are not fulfilled, the motion must be rejected in respect of all custodial sentences.

Contrary to the motion, the court may not include in the total sentence the custodial sentences therein.

If, because of the absence of legal conditions, it is not possible to include the custodial sentences in the total sentence as set out in the motion, the court may not call on the petitioner – or the convicted person – to consent to the total sentencing of the custodial sentences other than that provided for in the motion on the basis of the information provided to him/her.

If, in the court’s opinion, the conditions for inclusion in the total sentence are met for certain custodial sentences, the court may, following the rejection of an unfounded motion for total sentencing conduct the total sentencing procedure ex officio, provided that the convicted person consents to this.
 

on the adequacy of a certificate and its annexed minutes issued by a notary public as authentic documents

On the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by the Head of the Civil Chamber of the Curia, the Curia's Uniformity Complaint Panel has issued the following uniformity decision on the adequacy of a certificate and its annexed minutes issued by a notary public as authentic documents:
The Curia’s Decision No. Pfv.20.585/2022/4, which was  published in the Collection of Court Decisions, is applicable with the following binding interpretation: Pursuant to Section 23/C of Act LIII of 1994 on Judicial Enforcement, an enforcement clause can be added to the certificate of facts on the notice of denunciation issued between 1 July 2015 and 30 September 2023, and to the annex that contains the text of the denunciation verbatim if the annex is part of the document; that is, if the certificate of facts clearly identifies the annex or indicates the contextual context; in other words, if it contains a specific reference to the relationship with the annex or indicates the number of the annexed documents.
 

on the examination of the conditions for bringing an action for declaratory judgment

On the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by the Curia’s Panel No. P.VI, the Curia's Uniformity Complaint Panel has issued the following uniformity decision on the examination of the conditions for bringing an action for declaratory judgement:

1. Pursuant to Section 172 (3) of Act CXXX of 2016 on the Code of Civil Procedure, an action may be filed – as the legal effect of the statute of limitations - to establish that a claim should not be enforceable in court proceedings if the authorized petitioner decided not to initiate enforcement proceedings against the party seeking the declaratory judgment with the aim of enforcing the claim contained in a notarial deed.
2.  In the action brought pursuant to Section 172 (3) of Act CXXX of 2016 on the Code of Civil Procedure, the Curia’s Decisions No.  Pfv.21.648/2018/12 and Pfv.20.059/2022/8, and identical decisions, which were published in the Collection of Court Decisions, may no longer be invoked as binding if the party asks the court to establish - as the legal effect of the statute of limitations - that the claim contained in the notarial deed should not be enforceable against the party in court proceedings.
    

on the finding of an infringement of personality rights and the application of legal consequences

In uniformity proceedings conducted on the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by the Curia’s Panel No. P.IV, the Curia’s Uniformity Complaint Panel has delivered the following uniformity decision:

In the event of finding an infringement of rights pertaining to a person (personality rights), the natural person and the legal person who infringed the rights may be required to make a statement of apology or of regret as a means of satisfaction.

The Curia’s Panel No. P.IV may depart from Decision No. Pfv.21.435/2013/8, which was published in the Collection of Court Decisions.

The Curia’s Decision No. Pfv.21.435/2013/8 and similar decisions, which were published in the Collection of Court Decisions, may no longer be invoked as binding.
 

on the unlawfulness of a court decision that has been amended, quashed or annuled as a result of a legal remedy, and affects or restricts personality rights

In uniformity proceedings conducted on the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by the Curia’s Panel No. Pfv.4, the Curia’s Uniformity Complaint Panel has made the following uniformity decision: 

1. The court decision – which was amended, quashed or annulled as a result of a legal remedy, and affects or restricts personality rights – does not in itself constitute an infringement of personality rights.
2. The Curia’s Adjudicating Panel No. Pfv.4 may depart from decision No. Pfv.20.953/2021/4, which was published in the Collection of Court Decisions and which may no longer be invoked as binding.
    

on the judicial expert status of the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office 

On the basis of a motion for preliminary ruling submitted by the Curia’s Panel No. K.5, the Curia’s Uniformity Complaint Panel has made the following decision in relation to the judicial expert status of the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office:

1. As a body performing expert tasks related to the classification of research and development activities under the rules that were effective before 1 September 2023, the Hungarian Intellectual Property Office has not performed any judicial expert activities and therefore does not qualify as a judicial expert appointed in the preceding administrative procedure under Section 80 (1) of Act I of 2017 on the Code of Administrative Litigation.
2. The Curia’s Adjudicating Panel No. K.5 may depart from the legal interpretation given in decision No. Kfv. 35.034/2021/8, which was published in the Collection of Court Decisions and which may no longer be invoked as binding.
    

on the limitation period for a claim expressed in a notarial document to which an enforcement clause may be affixed

1. The actions listed under Section 327 (1) of Act IV of 1959 on the Civil Code interrupt the limitation period of a claim even if certain conditions exist as set out in Section 23/C (1) and (2) of Act LIII of 1994 on judicial enforcement for the provision of an enforcement clause to a notarial document.
2. The interruption of the limitation period of a claim shall also be governed by Section 327 (1) of Act IV of 1959 on the Civil Code even if certain conditions exists as set out in Section 23/C (1) and (2) of Act LIII of 1994  on judicial enforcement for the provision of an enforcement clause to a notarial document, but the claimant enforces his/her claim by filing a lawsuit instead of direct enforcement.
3. The Curia’s Adjudicating Panel No. Gfv.III may deviate from Decision No. Pfv.20.910/2020/8 and from other decisions with the same content, which have been published in the Collection of Court Decisions and which may no longer be invoked as binding.

on applicability of bilateral treaties on legal assistance to administrative matters

1. The scope of bilateral treaties on legal assistance must be assessed on the basis of substantive law.
2. Domestic law provides for the partial application of civil procedural rules to administrative disputes, which does not in itself mean that bilateral treaties on legal assistance are applicable in administrative matters.
3. Section 18 of the agreement between Hungary and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam on mutual legal assistance in civil matters – which was promulgated by Act LXXXVII of 2018 – in respect of exemption from security for legal costs cannot be applied in administrative cases.
4. The Curia’s Decision No. Kpkf.III.39.173/2022/2, which has been published in the Collection of Court Decisions, may no longer be invoked as binding.

on the admissibility of a petition for judicial review to ensure the uniformity of case law

1. In accordance with Section 118 (1)(a)(aa) of the Act of 2017 on the Code of Administrative Litigation, in order to ensure the uniformity of case law, a petition for judicial review may, in general, be admitted if the legally binding judgment raises a legal issue of theoretical importance on which the Curia has not yet ruled, provided that there is no coherent case law on this legal issue of theoretical importance that requires legal interpretation or provided that there is a risk of repeating a court decision that deviates from case law, and thus, of undermining the uniform application of law.
2. The Curia’s Adjudicating Panel No. K.VII. may deviate from the legal interpretation set out in Section 14 of the reasons of decisions No. Kfv.37.162/2023/2 and Kfv.37.172/2023/2, which were published in the Collection of Court Decisions; as a result, they may no longer be invoked as binding.

on punishment that may be imposed on juveniles

1. In the case of juveniles, Section 109 (1) of Act C of 2012 on the Criminal Code sets a special minimum term for punishment that differs from rules applicable to adult perpetrators; as a result, in the case of any crime punishable by imprisonment – regardless of the lower limit of the period of punishment specified in the Special Part – it shall be possible to impose a custodial arrest, community service work, a fine, prohibition to exercise professional activity, a driving ban, expulsion, a ban from visiting sports events or expulsion from sports events, or a combination of these penalties instead of imprisonment.
2. Decisions No. Bfv.420/2019/6 and Bfv.936/2018/15 may not be referred to as binding decisions.

on a taxable person’s right to deduct value added tax

1. A taxable person may not be denied the right to deduct value added tax (VAT) for the period prior to the cancelation of his tax number if his tax number was canceled for failure to deposit and electronically publish his annual financial report; then, after the rectification of this failure, it was established again that he would be allowed to exercise the aforementioned right, provided that the substantive legal requirements for the right to deduct VAT were fulfilled and that the taxable person did not act fraudulently or abusively in order to obtain that right.
2. The Curia’s “K.V.” Adjudicating Panel may deviate from its Decisions No. Kfv.35.184/2020/6, Kfv.35.186/2020/6 and Kfv.35.182/2020/6, which were published in the Collection of Court Decisions.
3. The Curia’s Decisions No. Kfv.35.184/2020/6, Kfv.35.186/2020/6, and Kfv.35.182/2020/6, as well as other similar decisions that were published in the Collection of Court Decisions may no longer be referred to as binding.

on the legal consequences of a fine imposed for failing to observe the time limit in a competition case

1. In competition cases too, a fine may be imposed for exceeding the administrative time limit.
2. In determining the amount of the fine, the assessment must include what type of legal harm the infringer has had to face due to the public authority’s failure to observe the administrative time limit; that is, whether, in light of the specific circumstances of the case, his right to fair proceedings has been violated and to what extent this justifies a reduction in the fine.
3. When assessing the lawfulness of the fine imposed after the time limit, it is irrelevant whether the authority was aware that it had exceeded the time limit applicable to it.
4. The Curia’s “K.I.” Adjudicating Panel may deviate from Decision No. Kf.II.37.959/2018/14, which was published in the Collection of Court Decisions.
5. Decision No. Kf.II.37.959/2018/14, which was published in the Collection of Court Decisions, may no longer be referred to as binding.

On remedies against the decision of the agricultural administration body passed in land auction proceedings

1. The land auction proceedings of the agricultural administration body do not fall under the scope of Act No. LIII of 1994 on Judicial Enforcement and therefore, as a rule, the legal remedy specified therein may not be availed of against the proceedings of that body.
2. If the bailiff fails to notify the agricultural administration body contacted with a view to auctioning a land of the fact that the conditions for the auction are not met, the person entitled to do so may lodge an enforcement objection against the bailiff's unlawful act or omission. The objection shall be determined in civil noncontentious proceedings by the court having ordered the enforcement.
3. The lawfulness of the auction proceedings of the agricultural administration body, in particular the call for auction, the publication of the auction notice, the conduct of the auction proceedings and the decisions in the auction report, may be challenged in an administrative lawsuit. Where, based on an enforcement objection, the court having ordered the enforcement has established an omission by the plaintiff constituting a violation of the law, the legal consequences of such violation will be drawn in the administrative lawsuit.

on the assessment of the status or quality of being ‘immediately preceding’ within the meaning of the Land Transfer Act

in assessing the status or quality of being ‘immediately preceding’ specified in section 46(1) and section 47(1) of Act No. CXXII of 2013 on the Transfer of Agricultural and Forestry Land, decisions No. Kfv.III.37.328/2016/7 and No. Kfv.III.37.301/2017/4, published in the Collection of Court Decisions, may not be cited as binding.

on substantive legal force when only a part of a claim is being enforced

1. If a party enforces only a part of a claim stemming from substantive law, the legal force of the judgment shall not cover the unenforced part of the claim.
2. In a new action filed for the enforcement of the formerly unenforced part of the claim, the still unadjudicated on-merits substantive conditions of the right sought to be enforced by the action may be examined.

on establishing succession in enforcement proceedings where a change in the identity of the parties have occurred before the issue of the enforceable legal instrument but is discovered subsequently

If a change in the identity of the debtor or the party seeking enforcement occurs before the issue of the enforceable legal instrument but is only discovered after the issue of the enforceable legal instrument, the court of enforcement shall have competence to decide on the issue of succession.

1. The essence of the notion of ‘local resident’ as defined in section 5(9) of Act No. CXXII of 2013 on the Transfer of Agricultural and Forestry Landis habitual living at a given place of residence, which fact must be proven by a document attached to the declaration accepting the offer to buy. An official certificate of address (address card) does, in itself, not prove the fact of living habitually at a given place of residence. This statutory condition can be verified by, among others, an official certificate issued by the municipal notary.
2. The data in the official certificate may be rebutted in administrative or civil contentious court proceedings, in which the court may take into account any appropriate means of proof.
3. Judicial panel No. K.VII. of the Curia may depart from decisions Nos. Kfv.II.37.320/2016/4, Kfv.IV.37.041/2019/7 and Kfv.III.37.387/2021/6, published in the Collection of Court Decisions.

on the object of misdemeanour vandalism committed by placing graffiti within the meaning of section 371(2) b) ba) of the Criminal Code and causing damage not exceeding regulatory offence value threshold, as well as on the determination of the damage caused by an act of vandalism

1. Graffiti, by which the placing of a coating on a surface is meant, constitutes a punishable conduct essentially from the aspect of protecting the interest in the undisturbed outer appearance of an attacked property owned by others.
2. The placing of graffiti on a surface meets the statutory elements of the offence of vandalism if the perpetrator makes an alteration – for example by placing a sign, a figure or an inscription – to the surface of the object against which the  offence is committed, namely any public or private property owned by others, more specifically a movable or immovable property having a monetary value, without the permission of the owner or the person entitled to manage the property [section 371(1), (2)(b)(ba) of the Criminal Code].
3. The placing of graffiti is not an independent criminal conduct but a manner of commission regulated by the law as an aggravated case and having relevance in the characterisation of the criminal act, which characterisation is linked to the size of the damage caused by the act. In the case of graffiti, the content, nature, and purpose of the depiction on the property is irrelevant; the mere fact of its being placed on the surface of the property constitutes an aggravated case.
4. The alteration of a surface by scribbling, painting (overpainting), staining (pouring), the change of the state of the property also amounts to damaging the property, and thus falls under the notion of damage to property, given that it changes the appearance of the original surface and the restoration of the original state is only possible at a financial cost. In this case, the cost of restoring the original condition constitutes the damage caused by vandalism [section 371(1), (7) and section 459(1), 16) of the Criminal Code].

on the right of remedy against a decision taken under a procedural provision specified in a separate Act of Parliament 

1. In the absence of a referring provision to that effect, the provisions of Act No. CXXX of 2016 on the Code of Civil Procedure ensuring the right to remedy are not applicable to a procedural provision specified in a separate Act.  
2. Pursuant to section 3:36(4) of Act No. V of 2013 on the Civil Code, no appeal is possible against an order rejecting a request for the suspension of the enforcement of a decision taken by a legal person.

on the costs of bringing up a child born with a genetic or teratological defect payable as compensation by the healthcare provider

Where the damages liability of a healthcare provider is established on account of the mother’s inability to exercise her statutory right to terminate her pregnancy because of the non-provision of medical information or the provision of incorrect medical information during the prenatal care, the parents of the child born with a genetic or teratological defect may claim damages for the additional child-rearing costs incurred in connection with the defect, but not for the full costs of the child’s upbringing.

on the interpretation of the rules of the Labour Code concerning the obligation to keep records of working hours

Section 134 of Act No. I of 2012 on the Labour Code does not explicitly provide for the employer's obligation to keep the records of working hours at the place of work. However, in view of the regulatory purpose of the obligation relating to keeping such records, the employer must record the working hours in an objective, reliable, up-to-date manner allowing the data to be checked.

on the enforcement of public and private law claims relating to a seizure

1. A claim for the payment of interest provided for in section 89 (1) and (2) of Joint Decree No. 11/2003 (8 May) IM-BM-PM on the Rules Governing Seizure and the Handling, Registration, Prior Sale and Destruction of a Property Seized in Criminal Proceedings and on the Execution of Confiscation may be enforced solely in criminal proceedings. If a concerned person claims that he/she has been unlawfully treated in criminal proceedings in relation to a seizure, the legal basis for a claim, including a claim for interest, made by the person in civil proceedings shall be damage caused in the exercise of public authority (by a state authority having acted in official capacity).
2. For the purposes of section 89 of Joint Decree No. 11/2003 (8 May) IM-BM-PM on the Rules Governing Seizure and the Handling, Registration, Prior Sale and Destruction of a Property Seized in Criminal Proceedings and on the Execution of Confiscation, seizure as defined in the Act on Criminal Procedure and any coercive measure against property to the execution of which the rules of seizure are applicable pursuant to an express provision of the Act on Criminal Procedure, shall be considered a seizure.

1. In accordance with the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations, in accordance with Article 119 of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code, in proceedings for the release of goods from customs duty, the customs authorities may release the goods from customs duty on the ground of an error by the customs authorities if the error could not have been detected by a bona fide customer, taking into account the nature of the error, with the care expected of a trader with similar professional experience.
2. The possibility of detecting the error cannot be excluded on the ground that the customer was himself in error.
3. The Administrative Uniformity Panel of the Curia of Hungary finds that the judicial panel of the Curia of Hungary may depart from the published decision taken in case No Kfv.35.131/2021/6.
4. The Administrative Uniformity Panel of the Curia of Hungary shall publish the uniformity decision in the Hungarian Gazette.

on the validity or illegality of the termination of a lease relationship by a lessor trustee 

If in an action brought under the rules of possession without title by a local government for the eviction of an immovable property owned by the local government  the respondent pleads that the termination of the lease is invalid or unlawful and that, consequently, the respondent’s possession has a title based on the lease contract, the pleading must be determined on its merits even if the lease contract was entered into and was subsequently terminated not by the owner local government but by a trustee, as lessor, not being a party to the action.

on the public law or private law nature of a legal relationship related to the use of public land, and on determining the court which is to hear such a case

1. A legal relationship concerning the use of public land is of public law nature.
2. The determination of a dispute relating to the use of public land falls within the jurisdiction of the administrative court.

on the enforcement of a claim arising from a lien registered in the Land Register against the new owner of a pledged property

The interpretation of the law given by the Curia of Hungary in contentious proceedings related to the enforceability of a claim arising from a lien registered in the Land Register against the new owner of a pledged property is also applicable to non-contentious proceedings.

In the absence of a statutory provision expressly providing for a procedure to remedy a default specified in section 128 (2) and (3) (e) of Act No. I of 2017 on the Code of Administrative Court Procedure, the initiation of an action for failure to act is not subject to the condition that the client initiates supervisory proceedings or applies to the supervisory body under section 15 (2) and 113 (2)(b) of Act No. CL of 2016 on the General Administrative Procedure. The statement of clains may not be rejected on the grounds of failure to initiate a supervisory procedure or to apply to a supervisory body under section 48 (1)(e) of Act No. I of 2017 on the Code of Administrative Court Procedure.

A failure to meet the condition prescribed in section 74/B (1) of Act No. XIX of 1998 on Criminal Procedure or section 108 (2) of Act No. XC of 2017 on Criminal Procedure, namely the absence of the consent of the person concerned, does not in itself render unlawful the publication of the image of a person exercising public authority, participating in a public hearing (public session) held in a criminal case.

On determining the court which is to adjudicate an appeal against an enforcement order issued in administrative court proceedings by a high court as a first instance court

An appeal against an enforcement order issued in administrative court proceedings by a high court (törvényszék) as a first instance court is to be determined by a regional court of appeal (ítélőtábla).

In the absence of an explicit statutory provision, the scope of total personal exemption from duties granted to the Hungarian State in section 5 (1) (a) of Act No. XCIII of 1990 on Duties does not extend to companies acting for and on behalf of the Hungarian State under a separate Act.

1. A petition for review filed on account of a procedural violation [under section 649(2) of Act No. XC of 2017 on Criminal Procedure (“Code of Criminal Procedure”)] has no direction.

2. The six-month time limit open for filing a petition for review against a defendant shall run from the date of notification of the final decision on the merits. If the decision on the merits notified to the public prosecutor’s office by promulgation did not become final upon promulgation, as well as in case of a decision on the merits notified by way of service, the six-month time limit shall run from the date of notification of the final decision on the merits [section 652(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure]

on the enforcement of the rules governing transfers of contracts under Act No. V of 2013 on the Civil Code

The transfer of a contract as regulated under Act No. V of 2013 on the Civil Code means transfer of all rights and obligations of the party leaving the contract to the party entering into the contract, resulting in legal succession between the parties leaving and entering into the contract while the continuity of the legal relationship is maintained.

If all rights and obligations arising from a contract concluded before the entry into force of Act No. V of 2013 on the Civil Code are transferred to another party under a statutory provision on or after 6 January 2016, the contract will thereafter be governed by the rules set out in Act No. V of 2013 on the Civil Code. In such cases, too, the transfer of contract will constitute legal succession, with the proviso that - for the purposes of section 53/C (2) of Act No. CLXXVII of 2013 on the Transitional and Authorizing Provisions related to the Entry into Force of Act No. V of 2013 on the Civil Code - the contract will be regarded as a new contract between the party remaining in the contract and the party entering into the contract. The content of the contract, the parties’ rights and obligations arising under the legal relationship will remain unchanged.

I. In assessing a human conduct, the provisions of the General Part of the Criminal Code excluding imputability in relation to that conduct shall be applicable mutatis mutandis, unless otherwise provided or excluded by a statutory provision. If, in determining the existence of own fault on the part of the perpetrator, the conduct has no identifiable point of reference indicating the perpetrator's accountability and the imputability of the conduct to him, own fault can be found only in case of an intentional conduct.

II. In finding and assessing own fault as a human conduct mentioned in section 87(1) of Act No. CCXL of 2013 on the Execution of Punishments, Measures, Certain Coercive Measures and Confinement for Petty Offences, the provisions of the General Part of the Criminal Code relevant to the examination of expectability, as the subjective side of imputability, cannot be disregarded. Thus, nothing that is relevant to the will of the person and the conduct performed by the person by his own free will. Hence, in assessing the existence of own fault, the fact of the worldwide pandemic, and the resultant and relating situation cannot be disregarded, either.

III. The Curia of Hungary calls upon the Penitentiary Unit of the Veszprém High Court to conduct ex post facto penitentiary judge proceedings in case No. 5.F.287/2020.

On certain questions relating to the voidness of a consumer, retail loan agreement

Under section 213(1)(b) of Act No. CXII of 1996 on Credit Institutions and Financial Enterprises, a consumer, retail loan agreement is null and void if it does not contain at all the annual percentage rate of charge.

On the termination of enforcement proceedings pending against a debtor at the time of the commencement of the liquidation proceedings

If in a set of enforcement proceedings pending at the date of the commencement of the liquidation the debtor transfers his real property to a third party and the ownership change is registered in the Land Register subsequent to the registration of the enforcement right, the enforcement proceedings may only be terminated after the enforcement auction has been held.

On the lawfulness of terminating a foreign currency-based consumer loan contract by a unilateral legal declaration with ex nunc effect

The settlement provided for in Act No. XL of 2014 imposing the obligation to settle accounts due to the partial voidness of a foreign currency-based consumer loan contract does not preclude the court from examining ex post, in accordance with the rules of civil law, whether the unilateral ex nunc termination of the contract by the financial institution on account of the debtor's alleged default was justified.

On the possibility of appeal against an order rejecting an application seeking the revocation of an enforcement sheet or the cancellation of an enforcement clause

Against an order rejecting an application seeking the revocation of an enforcement sheet or the cancellation of an enforcement clause, an appeal will lie.

On the enforcement under section 269(3) of Act No. IV of 1959 on the Civil Code of the lien obligor's rights in case of a separate and distinct (non-accessory) lien created as security

Where, in case of a separate and distinct (non-accessory) lien created as security, the successor of the person having directly acquired the lien had knowledge at the time of the acquisition of the lien, at least, of the fact that the separate and distinct (non-accessory) lien had been created in respect of another legal relationship as security thereof, the successor will be deemed to have had knowledge of the underlying legal relationship.

If the declaration of the holder of the pre-emption right manifestly fails to meet the substantive law requirements in terms of form or content, the buyer's ownership must be registered in the Land Register.

On the delegation of the joint right of signature

The provision on the delegation of the joint right of signature in section 47(2) of Act No. CXII of 1996 on Credit Institutions and Financial Undertakings shall not be applicable if the persons authorised to jointly sign for the company under section 47(1) grant a power of attorney under section 222 of Act No. IV of 1959 on the Civil Code for the representation of the credit institution in respect of the types of contracts defined in the scope of the financial services activities.

1. Based on section 23(1)(c)(cc) of Act No. CXXII of 2013 on Transactions in Agricultural and Forestry Land ('the Act'), as in force prior to 1 July 2020, the agricultural administrative body will refuse to approve a sale and purchase agreement – even if no acceptance has been received during the period of the publication of the contract, that is, even if no other person is entitled to pre-emption – if the legal basis of the right of pre-emption or the law on which the right of pre-emption is based cannot be determined from the buyer's declaration on his pre-emption right, or the pre-emption right is based not on the indicated Act, or not on the rank in the order of precedence as set out in the Act.

2. The Administrative Uniformity Panel of the Curia of Hungary finds that the adjudicative panel of the Curia of Hungary may, as requested, depart from decision no. Kfv.37.673/2016/4, published by the Curia of Hungary.

3. The Administrative Uniformity Panel of the Curia of Hungary will publish this decision in the Hungarian Gazette.

I. Following the physical division of a piece of land held in undivided shares, the right of an agricultural cooperative to use that piece of land shall cease by operation of law.

II. Unless otherwise provided for by the law, the cancellation of the right to use a land registered in the Land Register by the land registry authority may take place on the basis of a final decision ordering the physical division of a piece of land held in undivided shares, upon the authority's request.

III. In the absence of a direct substantive law interest, the agricultural cooperative has no right of action in respect of the decision ordering the registration of the ownerships of the thus divided plots of land in the Land Register.

IV. The Uniformity Panel of the Curia of Hungary finds that decision no. Kfv.37.475/2019/12 can no longer be invoked.

V. The Curia of Hungary will publish this uniformity decision in the Hungarian Gazette. 

On certain issues relating to the application of section 23/C of Act No. LIII of 1994 on Judicial Enforcement ('the Act')

1. In the exercise of his powers under section 23/C of the Act, a civil law notary may not examine the creation, validity or existence of an obligation set out in a notarial deed requested to be endorsed and appearing to be in due form.

2. It will not prevent the issuance of an enforcement order under section 23/C of the Act, nor will it serve as a ground for the cancellation of an issued enforcement order if the legal relationship underlying the obligation set out in the instrument requested to be endorsed has already been terminated by a unilateral legal declaration.

3. When an enforcement order is issued under section 23/C of the Act, the applicant may prove that the obligation set out in the instrument sought to be enforced has expired due to his unilateral declaration also by a notarial certificate issued in accordance with section 136 (1) (e) or (g) of Act No. XLI of 1991 on Civil Law Notaries.

1. The buildings subject to building tax shall be determined on the basis of Act No. C of 1990 on Local Taxes (' the Act'), and the provisions of other laws shall apply if so provided by the Act.

2. A building or a part of a building shall be subject to building tax if the conditions set out in section 11(1) and section 14(1) of the Act are met. A part of a building shall become subject to building tax not upon its registration as a separate property in the Land Register.

3. Once the part of the building has been converted into a separate building, the tax base shall be determined in the light of whether the additional premises have ceased to be ancillary.

On vehicle registration certificate kept in the creditor's possession as an atypical security

The right to possess a vehicle registration certificate until a loan is fully repaid can be validly stipulated in favour of the creditor also as an atypical security for a loan agreement for financing the purchase of a motor vehicle, where it is clear from the parties' loan agreement or the general terms and conditions of the loan agreement forming part of the parties' loan agreement that the right to possess the registration certificate functions as a separate and distinct security for the loan agreement.

1. As of 1 April 2020, the first instance determination of lawsuits commenced by statements of claim filed before 1 January 2018, arising from a public service relationship constituting a labour dispute under section 349(1) c)-d) of Act No. III of 1952 on Civil Procedure, shall fall into the competence of high courts (törvényszék) operating at the seats of the former administrative and labour courts (terminated on 31 March 2020), sitting as labour courts pursuant to section 20(2) of Act No. CXXX of 2016 on Civil Procedure.

2. As of 1 April 2020, the second instance determination of a lawsuit commenced by a statement of claim filed before 1 January 2018, arising from a public service relationship constituting a labour dispute under section 349(1) c)-d) of Act No. III of 1952 on Civil Procedure, shall fall into the competence of the court of appeal (ítélőtábla) operating in the jurisdiction of the administrative and labour court or high court having determined the case at first instance.

A lawsuit for acquisition of ownership of real property upon a claim arising under the law of obligations constitutes a lawsuit seeking ownership of real property, therefore in such cases the commencement of the lawsuit must, upon the request of a party, be recorded in the Land Registry under section 64(1) b) of Act No. CXLI of 1997 on the Land Registry.

In the review of the administrative activity of an administrative body vested with national jurisdiction, the administrative court's jurisdiction shall (in the absence of other special or exclusive jurisdiction) be based on the plaintiff's domicile, place of residence or seat.

Where agricultural land is expropriated, in the expropriation proceedings no compensation can be awarded directly to the lessee.

Where in a judgment imposing an aggregate sentence the court has, despite the proper provisions of the main judgments, unlawfully granted conditional release, the unlawfulness is to be eliminated not in simplified review proceedings but in resumed aggregate sentencing proceedings.

The Uniformity Panel finds that the judicial panel of the Curia of Hungary may depart from decision no. Kfv.II.37.894/2014/13 of the Curia of Hungary.

When hearing a witness following the entry into force of the Act on Criminal Procedure, the warning to witnesses must be communicated in conformity with the Act on Criminal Procedure, hence no warning can be made under the former Act on Criminal Procedure.

Where a witness has already been heard as a witness under the rules of the former Act on Criminal Procedure, at his repeated hearing held after the entry into force of the Act on Criminal Procedure, the warning to witnesses must be communicated to him in conformity with the new Act on Criminal Procedure.

Where a witness entitled to refuse to testify but not having refused to testify under the rules of the former Act on Criminal Procedure wishes to avail himself of this right and refuses to testify at his repeated hearing made after the entry into force of the Act on Criminal Procedure, his formerly given testimony shall not be used after the entry into force of the Act on Criminal Procedure.

Where a life sentence is imposed, exclusion from the possibility of conditional release is only possible in respect of criminal offences specified in section 44(1) of the Criminal Code.

No confiscation of a group of assets (an asset) to be released or returned to the injured party or already received by the injured party can be ordered; however, there is no obstacle to ordering confiscation for groups of assets by which the perpetrator has actually enriched himself through such an asset.

When a final decision on the merits is being quashed in review proceedings, the limitation period is to be examined, and if it is found that the offence is no longer punishable because it is barred by limitation, the legal consequences of such a finding must be drawn.

A person entitled to pre-emption and having accepted a sale and purchase contract, not subject to authority approval, on the transfer of the ownership of a land falling within the scope of Act No. CXXII of 2013 on Agricultural and Forestry Land Trade may enforce a claim arising from a violation of his or her pre-emption right under section 6:223 (2) of Act No. V of 2013 on the Civil Code.

In the action the court must be sought to establish that the sale and purchase contract is ineffective in respect of the person entitled to pre-emption and the contract has come into existence between the person entitled to pre-emption and the seller, due to the Statement of Acceptance made by the person entitled to pre-emption in the publication proceedings regulated under Act No. CXXII of 2013 on Agricultural and Forestry Land Trade.

I. Based on the notion of 'energy supplier' as specified in section 1 point 4) of Act No. XCIV of 2010 on a Special Tax on Certain Sectors, the statutory provision governing energy supply entrepreneurial activities does not cover activities performed outside Hungary. No Hungarian jurisdiction can be established for the purpose of levying the special tax on activities performed abroad.

II. The subject of the special tax can only be an entity having a licence covering the territory of Hungary. Only income originating from activities performed under a licence covering the territory of Hungary is subject to the special tax.

III. In examining the taxation of activities performed abroad, international agreements on double taxation must be taken into account.

An unsolicited declaration of intent to commit a criminal offence may also be suitable for establishing a criminal offence.

Where in determining an appeal against an order rejecting a statement of claims it can be clearly established that no ground for rejection exists and the statement of claims is suitable for starting the case initiation phase, the second instance court shall amend the first instance court’s order and shall not reject the statement of claims.

The second instance court shall act in the same way where in his appeal the plaintiff requests the court to quash the order but based on the content of the appeal he in fact alleges that his statement of claims is suitable for initiating the case.

In proceedings for the imposition of a single aggregated penalty, the date of the commission of the offences adjudged in the judgments delivered in the main proceedings is indifferent in determining the applicable criminal law; the date of the opening of the possibility of aggregating the penalties is of relevance.

The asset manager of a company can be the perpetrator of a misappropriation committed against the company, irrespective of the asset manager’s ownership share in that company.

1. An administrative authority decision is null and void where a ground for nullity specified in section 121(1) of Act No. CXL of 2004 on the General Rules of Administrative Authority Procedure and Services or in another Act of Parliament exists. The scope of the grounds for nullity cannot be broadened through interpretation.

2. An error or deficiency related to the signature of the person actually issuing the administrative authority’s decision does, in itself, not result in nullity but amounts to procedural irregularity.

3. In review proceedings instituted for establishing the nullity of an administrative authority decision the Curia will not conduct ex officio evidence-taking but may ex officio notice the evident nullity of an administrative authority decision. An administrative authority decision is evidently null where no separate evidence-taking is needed to establish its nullity.

4. If the first instance administrative authority decision is null, the court proceeding in the administrative lawsuit will quash the second instance administrative authority decision and will annul the first instance administrative authority decision.

I. Where in a set of administrative authority proceedings the client has legal representation, the service of a document on the legal representative will amount to legally valid communication of the document. In the absence of such legally valid communication, time limits for remedies will not start to run.

II. Where the client obtains knowledge of the content of the decision and files a court action, the court may examine how the absence of the legally valid communication of the [administrative authority] decision has affected the client’s remedy and fair trial rights and the requirement of legal certainty.

III. The uniformity panel no longer maintains decision No. EBH.2009. 2109 as a decision of principle.

A party exempted from the payment of duties under section 5 of Act No. XCIII of 1990 on Duties may not be obliged under section 86(2) of Act No. III of 1952 of the Code of Civil Procedure to pay duties in enforcement proceedings following a civil lawsuit.

I. In case of an offence of bankruptcy fraud violating section 404 subsections (1) or (2) of the Criminal Code, the injured party is the economic operator falling under the scope of the Act on Bankruptcy and Liquidation Procedure
- whose assets are, in a situation of insolvency or threat of insolvency, actually or pretendedly reduced by the perpetrator by committing one of the conducts specified in section 404 subsection (1) a/ or b/ or c/ of the Criminal Code, and the satisfaction of whose creditors’ claims is thereby partly or fully prevented by the perpetrator; or
- who has rendered itself, actually or pretendedly, insolvent by committing a conduct specified in section 404 subsection (1) a/ or b/ or c/ of the Criminal Code and who has thereby, partly or fully, prevented the satisfaction of its creditors’ claims.

II. In case of an offence of bankruptcy fraud violating section 404 subsection (4) of the Criminal Code, the injured party is the economic operator falling under the scope of the Act on Bankruptcy and Liquidation Procedure whose creditor is given preference, following the issuance of the liquidation order for the economic operator, by the perpetrator by violating the order of satisfaction specified in the Act on Bankruptcy and Liquidation Procedure for creditors’ claims.

III. In criminal proceedings instituted for an offence of bankruptcy fraud violating section 404 subsections (1), (2) or (4) of the Criminal Code, the creditor of the economic operator falling under the scope of the Act on Bankruptcy and Liquidation Procedure is not an injured party, therefore such a creditor cannot enforce a civil claim as a private party and cannot act as substitute private prosecutor, either.

Where in the relevant background laws the status of person performing public duty is conferred on a person listed in section 459(1) point 12 of Act No. C of 2012 on the Criminal Code solely for the purposes of criminal law protection, the person performing public duty cannot be a perpetrator of the felony offence of ill-treatment committed in proceedings conducted by a person performing public duty, governed by section 302 of the Criminal Code, or a perpetrator of the felony offence of abuse of a public duty situation, governed by section 306 of the Criminal Code.

Save for changing the defendant’s domicile (place of residence), partial release from house arrest prior to the filing of the bill of indictment falls in the public prosecutor’s competence.

The Uniformity Panel of the Curia of Hungary hereby terminates the judicial decision of the decision of principle status of no. EBD 2015.B.15, published in Volume 4 of 2015 of the Journal of Curia Decisions.

I. In child pornography cases specified in section 204(1) of Act No. C of 2012 on the Criminal Code, the fact that – irrespective of the number of the persons under the age of 18 in the recordings – the committed conduct appears in several pornographic recordings does, in itself, not result in cumulation. However, legal unity is only created by offences violating the provisions on the same statutory offence. In respect of this criminal offence, section 204(1) points a), b) and c) of the Criminal Code contains not identical but separate statutory elements.

II. Where, in respect of the same recording, the perpetrator has committed conducts specified in various points, the commission of criminal offences constituting legal unity and threatened with the most serious penalty is to be established.

III. Where the perpetrator has committed the conducts violating the various points of section 204(1) of the Criminal Code in respect of separate recordings, the conducts that constitute legal unity within the same section shall form real cumulation.

IV. In case of aggravated child pornography specified in section 204(2) of the Criminal Code, the number of counts shall be identical with the number of persons meeting the conditions specified in that section.

Save for military criminal proceedings, a charge shall be lawful even if it has been preferred by a public prosecutor other than the one operating at the court having competence and jurisdiction for conducting the proceedings.

However, in military criminal proceedings a charge shall only be lawful if it has been preferred by a public prosecutor designated by the military public prosecutor or the Chief Public Prosecutor for proceeding in military criminal proceedings. A violation of this rule attests to the absence of entitlement to prefer charges.

The Uniformity Panel of the Curia of Hungary hereby quashes criminal uniformity decision no. 2/2016.

From among the instruments containing procedural provisions the Uniformity Panel finds the following instruments to have continued relevance for the purposes of the new Code of Civil Procedure as well:

civil uniformity decisions nos. 3/2000 PJE, 4/2003 PJE, 2/2006 PJE, 4/2006 PJE, 2/2008 PJE, 4/2008 PJE, 1/2009 PJE, 1/2011 PJE, 2/2011 PJE, 1/2013 PJE and 3/2014 PJE;

civil department opinions nos. 1/2005 (VI. 15.) PK, 3/2008 (XI. 24.) PK, 2/2011 (XII. 12.) PK, 3/2011 (XII. 12.) PK, 1/2016 (II. 15.) PK (save for point 2) and 1/2017 (IX. 11.) PK;

civil department positions and joint positions of the Civil and the Economic Departments nos. PK-GK 2, PK 12, PK 13, PK 14, PK 15, PK 102, PK 127, PK 133, PK 134, PK 137, PK 138, PK 142, PK 145, PK 146, PK 148, PK 152, PK 154, PK 157, PK 158, PK 166, PK 169, PK 171, PK 175, PK 176, PK 177, PK 178, PK 179, PK 180, PK 189, PK 190, PK 191, PK 193, PK 195, PK 196, PK 199, PK 200, PK 212, PK 217, PK 218, PK 221 and PK 277.

The Uniformity Panel finds the following instruments to have continued relevance for the purposes of the new Code of Civil Procedure and the Code of Administrative Court Procedure as well:

-    uniformity decisions nos. 1/2005 KPJE and 2/2012 KMPJE;
-    department opinions nos. 3/2005 (XI. 14.) PK-KK and 1/2009 (VI. 24.) PK-KK.

1. Where the ownership of a property is transferred by the owner by retaining the usufruct for himself, usufruct will come into existence.

2. A contract under which the ownership of a property is transferred does not need to specify a separate legal ground for retaining the usufruct.

3. To register a retained usufruct in the Land Registry no separate document or registration permit is required.

4. The Land Registry authority shall register the retained usufruct ex officio, when complying with the request for registering the ownership of the property.

5. The Uniformity Panel no longer maintains decision no. EBH 2010.2281 as a decision declaring a principle of law.

1. The rule of specialty contained in Section 30 subsection (1) of Act no. CLXXX of 2012 on Cooperation with the Member States of the European Union in Criminal Matters does not prevent the Hungarian courts from fully applying the legal consequences specified in Act no. C of 2012 on the Criminal Code to a previous final conviction of a defendant surrendered for the purpose of being criminally proceeded against and found guilty in those proceedings.

2. Where in the course of the defendant’s surrender to Hungary the defendant has not expressly renounced the application of the rule of specialty and has committed the offence underlying the surrender during the probation period of a finally imposed suspended sentence of imprisonment, the subsequent ordering of the execution of a suspended sentence of imprisonment does not violate the rule of specialty set forth in Section 30 subsection (1) of Act no. CLXXX of 2012 on Cooperation with the Member States of the European Union in Criminal Matters, therefore such ordering does not require consent from the foreign judicial authority.

3. Where in the course of the defendant’s surrender to Hungary the defendant has not expressly renounced the application of the rule of specialty and the consent under Section 30 subsection (2) g) of Act no. CLXXX of 2012 on Cooperation with the Member States of the European Union in Criminal Matters has not been obtained from the judicial authority of the surrendering foreign state, the subsequent ordering in a special procedure governed by Section 572 subsection (1) b) of Act no. XIX of 1998 on the Criminal Code of the execution of a suspended sentence of imprisonment imposed for an offence committed before the surrender in a judgment not contained in the surrender request violates the rule of specialty.

In criminal proceedings no civil claim for compensation of damage caused by a criminal offence committed in connection with mandatory payments or budgetary supports falling within the competence of the National Tax and Customs Authority can be enforced by the National Tax and Customs Authority.

The National Office for the Judiciary is not a statutory representative of the legal person courts, therefore it may only represent a court upon authorisation to that effect. The statutory representative of a legal person court is the president of the given court. The president of a court is entitled to decide whether he, in his powers, wishes to arrange for the representation of his court in case this court as a party to a lawsuit, or wishes to authorise the National Office for the Judiciary to represent the court at issue.

Where in the assets in fiduciary management financial disadvantage exceeding the value limit of the regulatory offence is caused by the perpetrator by breaching one or several – various or repetitive (several kinds of) – asset management duties, the misappropriation of funds is to be evaluated as a natural unity, regardless of whether such misappropriation occurred simultaneously on one occasion, or successively in several parts.

However, where several (various) conducts breaching the asset management duties result in financial disadvantage constituting several various offences which separately, in themselves, also constitute a criminal offence, the conducts shall amount to continuous misappropriation of funds, provided that the further conditions of continuous commission are met.

1. Foreign currency-based consumer and retail loan contracts comply with the requirement set forth in Section 213 subsection (1) a) of Act no. CXII of 1996 on Credit Institutions and Financial Enterprises (henceforth: Hpt) where the written contract, including the general contractual terms which become part of the contract upon the conclusion of the contract, determines the provided loan amount in HUF (payment currency), provided that the equivalent amount in foreign currency (calculation currency) of the thus determined loan amount can be precisely calculated on the basis of the exchange rate applicable at the future time of conversion specified in the contract or, in lack of such stipulation, at the time of the disbursement of the loan amount.

2. Foreign currency-based consumer and retail loan contracts also comply with the requirement set forth in Section 213 subsection (1) e) of Hpt. where the written contract, including the general contractual terms which become part of the contract upon the conclusion of the contract, specifies in a predictable manner the numbers, amounts and payment dates of the instalments to be paid. The instalment amounts to be paid are to be regarded as predictable where the contract specifies, at least, the data and calculation method based on which the instalment amounts payable at the future time of conversion set forth in the contract or, in lack of such stipulation, at the successive due dates of the instalment payments can be precisely calculated.

3. Where a foreign currency-based consumer and retail loan contract, including the general contractual terms which become part of the contract upon the conclusion of the contract, contains the elements specified in paras 1. and 2. above, a unilateral legal declaration (e.g. reimbursement notification, loan repayment plan, loan repayment schedule) is to be considered as information provided to the consumer by the financial institution, not affecting the existence or validity of the contract at issue.

1. The Uniformity Panel of the Curia of Hungary hereby quashes civil uniformity decision no. 3/2012.

2. The signature of a witness to a last will and testament meets the requirements prescribed for signatures where the document is signed by the witness in a manner characteristic of him or her and reflects the individual writing style developed by the witness. Where the person of the witness cannot be identified from the document, the court may take evidence on this issue.

3. The decision published under no. EBH 2015.P.10 shall no longer be maintained by the uniformity panel as a decision on principle.

The felony offence of sexual violence committed against a person not having attained the age of 12 years violates Section 197 subsection (1) of Act no. C of 2012 on the Criminal Code and is, in view of subsection (2), to be characterized under subsection (4) point a) where the aggrieved party is a relative of or is brought up or supervised or cared or medically treated by the perpetrator or is in any other manner under the power or influence of the perpetrator, regardless of whether coercion has been used by the perpetrator.

The Uniformity Panel of the Curia of Hungary
1. quashes Decisions nos. 1/1998 PJE , 4/1999  PJE, 2/2000 PJE and 1/2006 PJE;
2. does no longer maintain its Opinion no. 2/2004 (XII. 2.) PK;
3. does no longer maintain Opinions nos. PK 129, PK 132, PK 140, PK 147, PK 150, PK 153, PK 155, PK 156, PK 162, PK 165, PK 167, PK 170, PK 182, PK 184, PK 198, PK 205, PK 206, PK 210, PK 211, PK 219, PK 220 and PK 263, and Department Opinions nos. GK 1, GK 60, GK 61 and GK 62, and Opinion GKT 58/1973 as guidance of principles.
4. does no longer maintain the reasoning of its Opinions nos. PK 152, PK 158 and PK 264.

Section 340/A subsection (2) point b) of the Code of Civil Procedure (Pp.) excludes the possibility of review only in cases where the administrative decision contains solely a provision imposing a fine.

1. The exclusion of the possibility of conditional release from life imprisonment is part of the constitutional order and the judicial application of such exclusion is not prohibited under any international treaty, provided that the statutory requirements are met.
Under the laws in force, the ECHR case law, the Constitutional Court’s decision and the 11 June 2015 review decision of the Curia of Hungary (no. Bfv.II.1812/2014/7), no departure from the established court practice developed on the imposition of life imprisonment without eligibility for parole  (whole life sentence) is warranted.

2. A decision prompted by a judgment of a human rights body set up under an international treaty and being in conformity with an international instrument promulgated in an Act of Parliament shall be adopted not directly under the European Convention on Human Rights (Convention) as a substantive and procedural law serving as a basis for the adjudication of the case but – based on the human rights body’s decision, by incorporating it into the Hungarian legal system – under the laws in force unaffected by the Convention violation, in review proceedings regulated in the Act on Criminal Procedure.

Section 18(1) b) of Act. No. II of 2007 on the entry and stay of third country nationals shall be construed so that in case in proceedings instituted for the acquisition or prolongation of a third country national’s entitlement to stay the third country national submits false data or untrue fact, he shall bear the legal consequences of such conduct. Where the entitlement to stay is sought for the purpose of carrying out income-earning activities, sustenance capability can be proved by lawful (taxed) income deriving from lawful income-earning activities. The submission of false data or untrue fact is committed when the data or fact is submitted. The immigration authority shall satisfy itself of the falseness of the data and/or the untrueness of the fact submitted. Section 18(1) b) of the said Act prescribes the mandatory application of the legal consequences (denial, withdrawal), hence the authority shall have no margin of appreciation.

The Uniformity Panel of the Curia of Hungary
1. hereby quashes decision no. 1/2003 KPJE, decision no. 1/2007 KPJE, decision no. 1/2008 KPJE and decision no. 2/2008 KPJE;
2. no longer upholds joint opinion no. 1/2002 (IV. 22.) PK-KK, opinion (correctly: joint) opinion no. 1/2003 (II. 17.) PK (correctly: PK-KK), point 2 of joint opinion no. 3/2005 (XI. 14.) PK-KK and points 2-3 of joint opinion no. 1/2009 (VI. 24.) PK-KK;
3. no longer upholds joint opinion no. BKT-PKT-GKT 1/1981 and joint opinion no. BKT-PKT-GKT 1/1986 as guidelines on principles.

A second instance court order quashing a first instance decision and remitting a case to the first instance court shall have formal binding effect, therefore the Chief Public Prosecutor may, in the interest of legality, seek remedy against such an order.

The respondent of an administrative lawsuit instituted for the review of a decision related to the tasks specified under Section 4 subsection (9) of Act No. CXXXIX of 2013 on the National Bank of Hungary as in force till 31 December 2014 will be the National Bank of Hungary; the Financial Stability Board will proceed in the name of the National Bank of Hungary.

The Uniformity Panel of the Curia of Hungary hereby quashes uniformity decisions nos. 4/2005, 1/2006, 4/2006 and 5/2006 of the Supreme Court, which therefore shall not be applicable from the date of the publication of the present uniformity decision.

The Uniformity Panel of the Curia of Hungary hereby quashes uniformity decision no. 1/2012 BKMPJE of the Curia.

A tax liability or other public charge arisen after the starting date of the liquidation proceedings forms part of the preservation, conversation and sale costs related to the pledged property and mentioned in Section 49/D subsection (1) of Act No. XLIX of 1991 on Bankruptcy and Liquidation Procedures, and may therefore be deducted from the purchase amount received from the sale of the pledged property.

The 8-day time limit allowed for filing an objection against a liquidator’s allegedly unlawful measure or omission is a procedural time limit, non-observance of which may be remedied by filing a justification for delay.

The supervisory fee imposable under section 65, subsection (4) of Act no. XCIII of 1990 on Duties (henceforth: Itv.) shall be imposed in an amount reduced under section 58, subsection (1), point c) of Itv. in an order under section 80, subsection (3) of Act no. V of 2006 on Public Company Information, Company Registration and Winding-up Proceedings (henceforth: Ctv.) discontinuing the judicial supervisory proceedings on a company not contesting the unlawfulness specified in the court of registry notification made under section 80, subsection (1), point b) of Ctv. but terminating the unlawfulness and/or restoring lawful operation within the prescribed time limit.

The Civil Department of the Curia of Hungary

1. shall regard the following legal instruments as applying mutatis mutandis, to the new Civil Code as well:
- from among the PJE decisions PJE decisions nos. 1/2002, 3/2004, 2/2006, 4/2006, 1/2008, 1/2011, 3/2012 and 6/2013,
- from among the PK opinions PK opinions nos. 1/2005, 1/2006, PK opinion no. 1/2008 point VIII, PK opinion no. 2/2009 points 2, 6, 8, 9, PK opinion no. 1/2010 point 10, PK opinion no. 2/2010 points 2-4, 5/b, 6-9 and 10/b, PK opinion no. 1/2011 points 1-7 and 9-12, PK opinions nos. 2/2011, 3/2011, PK opinion no. 1/2012 points 1-11 and 15 and PK opinion no. 2/2012,
- from among the Polgári Elvi Döntések (Civil Law Decisions of Principle) Polgári Elvi Döntés no. XXV point I, save the last sentence and the related reasoning, as well as points II, IV and V, and Polgári Elvi Döntés no. XXVI,
- from among the PK resolutions PK resolutions nos. 1, 3, 4, 6, PK resolution no. 9 points III, IV and VII, PK resolutions nos. 29, 31, 34, 35, 40, 46, 47, 48, 76, 77, 80, PK resolution no. 85 point b), PK resolutions nos. 86, 87, 88, PK resolution no. 89 points a) and b), PK resolutions nos. 90, 97, 102, 104, 113, 192, 217, 261, 262, 265, 267, PK resolution no. 279 point II, PK resolution no. 281 and PK resolution no. 298 points I and III,
- from among the GK resolutions GK resolution nos. 12, 30, 47, 54, 57, 65 and GK-MK resolution no. 1.
- from among the GKT resolutions resolution no. 26/1973.

2. shall, regardless of the new Civil Code, quash or regard as outdated the following legal instruments even in the determination of cases to be adjudicated under the former Civil Code or other, already repealed laws:
- from among the PJE decisions PJE decisions nos. 2/1998, 1/1999, 3/1999, 5/1999, 2/2002, 1/2003, 2/2003, 3/2003, 1/2004, 2/2004, 3/2008, 2/2010, 3/2010, 4/2010 and 1/2012;
- from among the PK opinions PK opinions nos. 2/2002 and 3/2004 and PK opinion no. 2/2010 point 1;
- from among the PK resolutions PK resolutions nos. 41, 50, 51 and 75;
- from among the GK resolutions GK resolutions nos. 7, 17, 21, 39, 43, 64 and 74;
- from among the GKT resolutions GKT resolutions nos. 7/1973, 28/1973, 63/1973, 65/1973 and 85/1973.

Based on Article 417, paragraph (1) of Act XIX of 1998 on the Code of Criminal Procedure, in cases where the charge was brought by a private prosecutor or a substitute private prosecutor, the public prosecutor is not entitled to submit a motion for judicial review for reasons set out in Article 406, paragraph (1), points a)-d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

With the exception of tax and customs proceedings and proceedings overviewing institutions of adult education, Article 12/A of the Act on Small and Medium Enterprises shall be applied in any proceeding carried out in respect of small and medium enterprises if the infringement of law did not result in the apparent danger of human life, physical integrity and health, in environmental damage or in the violation of law protecting persons under 18 years of age.

According to tax law regulations in force until 31 December 2011 the sale of a movable property within the framework of business activity is a conduct of business, for which the tax payer shall pay personal income tax under Article 58, paragraph (8) of the Act on Income Tax and according to the regulation on revenue coming from independent activity even if the tax payer failed to register himself as VAT payer and thereby he did not become entitled to VAT deduction.

The person on whom imprisonment was imposed for premeditated crime cannot be placed on probation if the person committed this new crime after the end of an earlier probation period authorised during the execution of an earlier imprisonment and that former probation was later terminated in relation to another case.

1.    The clause of a foreign exchange loan contract which stipulates that the risk of foreign exchange shall be taken without restrictions by the consumer – in exchange for a favourable interest rate – forms part of the main subject matter of the contract, therefore, as a main rule, its unfairness is exempt from assessment. The unfairness of such clause can be assessed and established only if its content, i.e. the text of the contract and the information provided by the financial institution, is not clear and intelligible for the average consumer, who is reasonably well-informed and reasonably observant and circumspect (hereinafter: consumer) when the contract is concluded. If due to insufficient information or lack of information by the financial institution there is reason for the consumer to believe that the risk of exchange is not real or that it burdens him/her only to a limited degree, the contractual clause related to the risk of exchange is unfair, which leads to the invalidity of the contract in part or in full.

2.    Contractual clauses enabling unilateral amendment of a contract are unfair if they do not comply with the principles laid down in point 6 of Opinion no. 2/2012 (XII. 10.) of the Civil Department of the Curia on the unfairness of the right to unilateral contract amendment in the general terms and conditions applied by financial institutions in consumer loan contracts (the principle of clear and intelligible drafting, the principle of taxonomic definition, the principle of objectivity, the principle of factuality and proportionality, the principle of transparency, the principle of terminability, and the principle of symmetry). Based on these principles, contractual clauses defining the criteria of unilateral contract amendment are fair if they clearly and intelligibly define how and to what extent changes in the circumstances of causes listed in the above Opinion affect the consumer’s payment obligations and if they make it possible to verify the unilateral amendments’ compliance with the principles of proportionality, factuality and symmetry as well as with the other contractual terms.

3.    The application of a different exchange for the purposes of repayment of the loan (selling rate) to that used for the advancement of the loan (buying rate) is unfair because the financial institution does not provide any service directly for the consumer, therefore it is an unjustified cost for the consumer. These clauses are furthermore unfair because the economic reasons for their application are not clear, not intelligible and not transparent for the consumer. In view of the derogatory provisions of Article 231, paragraph (2) of the Civil Code, the buying and selling rates applied in foreign exchange loan contracts as rates of conversion shall be replaced by the official foreign exchange rate of the Hungarian National Bank until mandatory provisions of law enter into force.

The Curia does not uphold decision no. EBH.2013.G.10 in its quality as a decision on principle.

Uniformity decision 6/2013 PJE

Chaired by the President of the Curia, the Civil Department, proceeding as a uniformity panel, passed its uniformity decision in issues of principle that arose in connection with foreign currency loan contracts.

In Hungary between 2003 and 2008 approximately 750.000 foreign currency loan contracts were concluded. Due to the considerable weakening of the Forint after the conclusion of the contracts, the instalments of the debtors drastically rose, creating a major social problem. The number of court cases involving foreign currency loan contracts significantly increased. At the beginning of November 2013 the head of the Civil Department asked for information from tribunals and courts of appeal concerning the number of cases related to foreign currency loan contracts and law application problems in such cases. Based on the information provided and on the findings of a discussion at the Szeged Court of Appeal, the head of the Civil Department of the Curia initiated a uniformity procedure in order to develop judicial practice in the field concerned.

The Civil Department of the Curia decided on the matters with more than two thirds majority. During the very short time, only three weeks, at disposal the decision, which is binding on courts, was preceded by an extraordinarily intensive preparatory work, in the course of which the Prosecutor General ex officio expressed his standpoint and the chair of the uniformity panel requested the opinion both of the President of the Hungarian National Bank and Lajos Vékás law professor.

The operative part of the uniformity decision reads as follows:

1.    Foreign currency based credit agreements, loan agreements and financial leasing contracts (hereinafter: foreign currency loan contracts) are foreign currency contracts. The parties denominated the creditor’s and the debtor’s financial liability arising from the loan contract in foreign currency (denominated currency), and they had to pay it in Forints (paid currency). With such contracts the debtor got into debt under the conditions of an interest rate more favourable than that of the Forint loan in the given period, therefore, the debtor shall bear the impacts of the exchange rate changes: the weakening of the Forint leads to an increase of the debtor’s financial burden, while strengthening leads to a decrease thereof.
2.    Just the fact that the exchange rate changes burden the debtor in exchange for the more favourable interest rate does not render the foreign currency loan contract as a type of contract unlawful, obviously immoral, usurious or sham, nor is the contract aimed at impossible services. The unforeseeable one-way shift of contractual burdens after the conclusion of the contract cannot be evaluated from the viewpoint of invalidity, since the cause of invalidity has to exist at the time of the conclusion of the contract.
3.    The statutory obligation of the financial institution to provide information had to extend to the possibility of exchange rate change and its impact on the payments. The obligation to provide information could not extend, however, to the extent of the exchange rate change.
4.    If the court establishes the nullity of a contract, upon a claim (counterclaim) for the application of the legal consequences, the court has to endeavour primarily to render the contract valid, provided that the cause of nullity can be eliminated or has subsequently terminated.
5.    If the court finds a clause of a consumer contract void but the contract can be performed without the invalid part, the clause found to be void becomes ineffective from the point of view of legal consequences, however, the remaining contractual clauses continue to bind the parties.
6.    It is only after the European Court of Justice passes a preliminary ruling in case C-26/13 that the uniformity panel of the Curia will answer the question when a contractual term which makes unilateral amendment of contracts possible meets the requirements of transparency.
7.    Amendment of a contract by the court is a legal means having the function to remedy in individual cases the adverse impact that a change in the circumstances of the long-term legal relation of the parties after the conclusion of the contract has on the legitimate interests of either party. It is not, however, a legal means to remedy the consequences of comprehensive economic changes affecting a great amount of a particular type of contracts in a similar way – in a way that is detrimental only to one of the parties. If the legislature has addressed these detrimental consequences in a legal rule from a certain viewpoint, the intervention on the part of the legislature excludes individual judicial discretion in that viewpoint.

In a consumer contract an arbitration court condition based on a general contractual term or on a term not negotiated individually is unfair.

The court is obliged to recognise the unfairness of such a condition ex officio, but it can establish its nullity only if the consumer, upon the call of the court, makes reference to it.

1.    In an action brought to establish the nullity (or partial nullity) of a contract based on Article 239/A of the Civil Code, the satisfaction of conditions listed in Article 123 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall not be examined.
2.    a. As a main rule in an action brought by virtue of Article 239/A of the Civil Code, the value of the subject-matter of the litigation shall be determined based on the value of consideration for services defined in the contract.
b. If, by virtue of Article 239/A, an action is brought to establish the partial nullity of the contract, the value of the subject-matter of the litigation shall be considered as non-definable, except when the value linked to the disputed contractual condition can be defined separately from the value of consideration due for the services indicated in the contract.
3.    In an action brought by virtue of Article 239/A a counter-claim for the application of the legal consequences of the nullity can be filed only if the defendant does not dispute the nullity of the contract, that is if (s)he accepts what is included in the claim.

The concept „contractual debt” appearing in Article 27, paragraph (2) point a) of Act XLIX of 1991 on Bankruptcy and Liquidation Proceedings involves creditors’ claims recognised by the debtor in the contract and other claims of the creditor originating from the contract about which the creditor informed the debtor to an extent necessary for raising awareness of the debt demand, including demands originating from not proper contractual performance or from the termination of the contract.

The present uniformity decision replaces part III of Directive no. 15 on the Protection of Life and Physical Integrity through Criminal Law.

Based on Article 195, paragraph (3) of Act CLXI of 2011 the Curia repeals Directive no. 15 on the Protection of Life and Physical Integrity through Criminal Law as a directive, replacing parts I and II with this uniformity decision.

If the enforceability of public work or financial penalty imposed in a final decision expired before 1 May 2010, there is no further lawful possibility to enforce the punishment.

However, if the enforceability of public work or financial penalty did not expire until 1 May 2010, the period of limitation pertaining to the enforceability of punishment shall be five years.

In administrative cases under Chapter XX of Act III of 1952 on the Code of Civil Procedure, tax secret qualifies as a secret defined in a separate act according to the first sentence of Article 119, paragraph (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure. In the judicial proceeding tax secret shall be treated in compliance with the principle of purpose limitation.

In administrative cases the parties shall have access to all information on tax secrets involved in the case. A tax secret about which no information is provided cannot be used as evidence.

In the judicial review procedure of an administrative decision the experts appointed by the court are entitled to get to know and assess all those tax secrets that they need to know in order to complete their duties.

The object of the lawsuit filed on the basis of Article 33/A of Act XLIX of 1991 on Bankruptcy Proceedings and Liquidation Proceedings is to establish the liability of the executive of the economic operator. The court fees shall be imposed based upon the non-definable sum in dispute irrespective of the fact that in the claim the plaintiff has to point out the extent of the decrease of assets and that the court has to define it in monetary terms.

If the sum collected in the course of judicial enforcement does not cover the full amount of the costs of enforcement specified in Article 164, paragraph (1) of the Act on Judicial Enforcement, at first the unpaid duties and the costs advanced by the state shall be settled.

In the absence of further costs of priority the costs of filing, ordering and implementation of the enforcement proceeding shall be proportionately satisfied from the remaining sum.

If the accused person’s residence becomes unknown after submitting the indictment and the warrant issued against the accused did not have any result, the proceeding can be resumed in the absence of the accused according to Chapter XXV of the Code of Criminal Procedure only if the prosecutor makes a proposal for that based on Article 529, paragraph (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

In view of Article 529, paragraph (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure the court shall suspend the proceeding if the prosecutor proposes not to resume the proceeding or fails to make a proposal for the resumption of the proceeding in the absence of the accused within the prescribed time period of fifteen days in Article 529, paragraph (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

In such a case the reason of suspension is that a proceeding against an accused whose residence is unknown cannot be continued in the absence of a motion by the prosecutor.

After suspension, however, the prosecutor can still propose to resume the proceeding in the absence of the accused by applying the provisions pertaining to special proceedings in Chapter XXV of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The obstacle to resume the proceeding, therefore the reason of suspension, is in this way removed. Therefore, the court shall resume the proceeding based on the prosecutor’s motion in view of Article 266, paragraph (5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The witness to a will has to sign the document in the usual way that is characteristic of him/her. The signature of the witness cannot be substituted by initials, illegible signs or the stamp of the attorney-at-law. The person of the witness shall be identifiable based on the document.

The Civil Department of the Curia does not uphold the last sentence of point II of the Civil Economic Decision on Principle no. I of the Supreme Court, neither the last indent of the reasoning in connection to that, nor Standpoint no. GK 11 of the Supreme Court.

I. The prosecutor, an abstract legal entity governed by public law, is authorised to exercise the rights of a party. In litigious or non-litigious civil proceedings that are initiated by them or against them according to a separate law, they take part in each stage of the proceeding as a plaintiff or a defendant. As an abstract legal entity governed by public law, the prosecutor is represented by the competent prosecution organ, which is subject to change in the various stages of the proceeding.

II. In civil proceedings, in which the claim follows from a contract made by the prosecution service or from damage caused by the prosecution service out of contract, the Office of the Prosecutor-General shall act as party to the case.

Persons fulfilling service and working in a public place shall not be considered public entities, therefore, rendering public a photo or video record of them that makes identification possible, is subject to authorisation by the person concerned.

The Hungarian financial branch of a foreign financial undertaking seated in an EEA member state, established according to Act CXXXII of 1997 on the Hungarian Branch Offices and Commercial Representative Offices of Foreign-Registered Companies, does not have the capacity to be a party in legal proceedings.

1. According to Article 38, paragraph (1) of Act XCIII of 1990 on fees, a court proceeding starts by submitting a claim, a claim for an out-of-trial proceeding, an appeal, a request for the re-opening of a case or a request of review by the Curia. According to the Act the various stages of court proceedings, the first instance and appeal stages constitute separate proceedings that are subject to separate fees.

2. The base of the fee shall be calculated in each proceeding according to Article 39, paragraphs (1)-(3) of the Act.

3. Act CLVI of 2011 on the amendment of certain tax regulations and other relevant law shall be applied in court proceedings that started after 1 January 2012.

Misuse of personal data, thereby violating the first indent of Article 177/A, paragraph (1), point a) of the Criminal Code, can be committed by anybody, not only by the controller of data as defined in data protection regulation.

Hereinafter the decision on principle no. 926 of 2003, published in the Official Corpus of Supreme Court Decisions, shall not be considered as guiding.