Litigation in Portugal

When a side wins, the other can be convicted to reimburse the court fees paid by the wining party as well as a compensation for attorney fees. However, that compensation is calculated by reference to the court fees paid by the parties and not for the real costs incurred to with attorneys. Most of the time, the compensation is not nearly enough to pay for said fees.

Litigation in Thailand

In civil cases, a court deposit is required. If the client wins, then the court deposit is refunded. If the client loses the deposit is forfeited. The prevailing party in a court dispute can also claim attorney’s fees. However, the Thai court rarely grants the other party’s legal fees in civil cases. If a client is granted attorneys’ fees, then the fees are awarded pursuant to a specific court rate. The court rate attorneys’ fees are much less than the market rate.

Litigation in Denmark

The Danish courts have been overwhelmed with cases the last few years. There is currently a focus on expediting cases concerning violence, weapons and sexual abuse. Thus, the civil cases are scheduled for hearing before a judge 15-24 months after the initial pleading/subpoena.

Litigation in England and Wales

The law of England & Wales only applies in England & Wales. There is no UK legal system as such. The Scottish legal system is quite different to that of England & Wales and of Northern Ireland, in that it is not based on common law principles, rather it is based on Roman law and is similar to the continental European systems. It has adopted certain aspects of the English system and is now a form of “hybrid” civil/common law system. It also has a split profession.

Oral Arguments

Unlike an argument in a bar or at the dinner table, oral arguments in commercial litigation usually have an organized structure. In a trial court, the judge normally invites the lawyer making a motion to explain why her motion should be granted. And at an appellate court, the judges invite the appellant’s lawyer to explain why the trial court’s decision should be reversed. Then the lawyer begins speaking and opposing counsel is supposed to remain silent. The judge or judges, however, may interrupt with questions and even maintain a back and forth conversation with the attorney about the arguments.

Making a Motion

A movant will often submit a legal report, called a brief or memorandum of law, explaining why the motion should be granted. The brief will usually recount the facts of the case and cite relevant law that explains why the judge should grant the motion. These documents can range in length from a few pages to twenty-five or more. Briefs often refer to evidence and, when they do, they cite to supporting affidavits or declarations.

Cross Examination at Trial

Sometimes during cross-examination, things don’t go as planned. The witness may give a bad answer or the judge may cut off a line of questioning even though the lawyer really wanted to continue it. In those events, a lawyer is usually best served by remaining calm. Acting like these are huge losses may communicate to others that even the lawyer thinks their case is in bad shape. And while those losses are scary in the moment, a trial often has numerous opportunities for each side to make its case.

The Convention on the International Sale of Goods

Parties can determine whether the CISG is helpful for them or not based on whether they prefer its terms over the ones found in another applicable law. But putting those substantive differences aside, I believe that there is a significant benefit to the CISG, and a significant drawback.

Trial Exhibit Lists

The process for making an exhibit list often begins several weeks before a “pretrial conference” with the judge to discuss the trial. Often the judge’s rules or the court’s rules will instruct the parties to exchange proposed lists of exhibits. By exchanging these lists before the conference, the parties can identify the subjects of agreement ahead of time and then present their disagreements to the judge at the conference.

Direct Examination at Trial

According to an old adage, in cross examination the lawyer is the star, but in direct examination, the witness is the star. And so lawyers often draft questions so that the questions are short but the answers are long. Not only does this allow the judge or jury to focus more on the witness with firsthand knowledge than on the lawyer, but it also complies with a rule against “leading questions.”

Bench Trials and Jury Trials

Commercial dispute plaintiffs in the United States often get to decide whether to have their claims decided at trial by judge or by a jury. Plaintiffs often select juries, because juries may be sympathetic to their claims. But there are also compelling reasons for a plaintiff to have a “bench trial,” in which the judge decides the facts of a case.

More Details on Discovery and Trials in China

Unlike the U.S., there is no evidence discovery system in China. In principle, parties should bear the burden of proof for their claims/defenses and arguments in lawsuits. As a result, plaintiffs usually initiate lawsuits when they believe they have enough evidence to win.