Abstract

Pursuant to Art. 357 § 2 in conjunction with Art. 13 § 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure the decision to dismiss the complaint against the bailiff’s actions is issued in a closed session and, in principle, is not subject to substantiation since it is not challengeable by appeal. The party that challenges the decision by means of a complaint against the bailiff’s actions has no opportunity to learn the court’s reasons underlying its decision to dismiss the complaint. The preparation and delivery of the substantiation for the decision which is not subject to appeal prolongs the proceedings and makes it necessary to transfer bailiff’s files to the court. This may also lead to a temporary cessation or stay of enforcement. The first instance court decisions in the enforcement proceedings are to facilitate the efficient conduct of enforcement. In this context the explanatory and interpretative function of the substantiation for the decisions issued in these proceedings is not significant and does not provide an argument in favour of introducing the requirement to substantiate such decisions. There are many legal instruments that allow the debtor to exercise the right to fair court procedure. The exclusion of substantiation for the unchallengeable decision to dismiss the complaint against the bailiff’s actions does not lead to the debtor being deprived of all elements of procedural fairness in enforcement proceedings.