When someone decides to take their dispute to court, they are often dealing not only with whether they have a chance of success, but also how much the dispute will cost them. Court fees, attorney’s fees or other expenses can be a significant item. In this article, we explain who generally pays court costs and when the other side may also pay them.
In civil court proceedings (e.g. disputes over payment of debt, damages, property rights, settlement of BSM, protection of personality or other private law disputes between individuals, companies or other entities), the payment of costs depends mainly on the type of proceedings and who was successful in the case. In classic civil litigation, the basic principle of success applies: the losing party generally reimburses the successful party for costs reasonably incurred. If each party is only partially successful, the court may apportion the costs or decide that neither party is entitled to recover them. This rule follows from section 255 of the Civil Procedure Code. At the same time, a distinction must be made between court fees, which are generally paid when the action or application is brought, and costs, the payment of which is decided by the court only in connection with the outcome of the proceedings. During litigation, a party usually pays its own costs, such as a lawyer, travel expenses or an expert’s report. Only at the end does the court decide whether the other party should reimburse them. The court also decides on the claim for costs without an application in the decision closing the proceedings; the specific amount of compensation is usually determined in a separate order after the decision has become final. In practice, this may mean that these costs are borne continuously for several years, as court proceedings in Slovakia may last approximately 3 to 5 years in more complex cases, sometimes even longer.
In civil litigation, costs are awarded in proportion to the success of the case. If one party wins the dispute in its entirety, the court will normally award costs against the unsuccessful party. If the plaintiff loses, he may be ordered to pay the defendant’s costs. If the defendant loses, he may be ordered to pay the plaintiff’s costs.
If a party is only partially successful, the court shall apportion the costs. An example might be a situation where the claimant sues for €10,000 but the court awards only €5,000. In that case, the court assesses the proportion of success and failure of both parties. In some cases, it may also decide that neither party is entitled to costs.
The court fee for an action or other claim is usually paid initially by the person bringing the action. This is typically the plaintiff or the claimant. However, if that party succeeds in the proceedings, the court fee may be part of the costs to be reimbursed by the unsuccessful opposing party. The Court Fees Act regulates who is liable for the fees for each type of application and proceeding.
Each participant usually pays his or her own expenses during the event. This may include, in particular, lawyer’s fees, attorney’s fees, travel expenses, expert reports, translation costs or other expenses necessary for the conduct of the litigation. Whether they are ultimately reimbursed by the opposing party depends on the court’s decision on costs.
If the opposing party succeeds in the litigation and was represented by a lawyer, the court may also award legal costs. However, this does not mean that the unsuccessful party automatically pays any costs without limit. Reimbursement relates to costs reasonably incurred and the amount is determined in accordance with the procedural rules (Ordinance on lawyers’ fees and indemnities).
If there are more than one party to a dispute, the question may arise as to how the costs are to be divided between them. In practice, it depends on their procedural position, the degree of success, the nature of the dispute and how the court decides on their obligation or entitlement to costs. Therefore, where there are several claimants or defendants, it cannot automatically be assumed that there will be an equal division of costs in each case.
Not all proceedings are governed by the principle that the losing party pays costs to the winning party. In civil extra-judicial proceedings, the general rule under Article 52 of the Civil Procedure Code is that neither party is entitled to costs unless the law provides otherwise. This is the case, for example, in multiple family, status or other non-contentious matters.
Caution should be exercised in family and other non-adversarial proceedings. The classic who loses, pays rule does not always apply. In many out-of-court cases, the parties bear their own costs or the court decides according to the specific rules and circumstances of the case. Therefore, it cannot automatically be said that the successful party is always entitled to costs.
Inheritance proceedings have a special regime. The costs associated with the proceedings, in particular the fees of the notary as court commissioner, are treated differently from those in traditional litigation. As a rule, they are borne by the heirs according to what they have acquired from the inheritance. Therefore, the simple principle that the losing party pays the winning party does not apply in inheritance proceedings.
If the party’s circumstances so justify, the court may, on application, exempt him or her from the payment of court fees. However, exemption from court fees does not automatically mean that the party will never have to bear any of the costs of the proceedings or that he cannot be ordered to pay the costs of the other party. A distinction must be made between court fees and compensation for costs.
If you take legal action and are unsuccessful, you may have to pay not only your own costs, but also those of the other party. Typically, this may be court fees, solicitor’s fees or other expenses reasonably incurred in connection with the court proceedings. The basic rule in civil litigation is simple: costs are awarded according to the proportion of success in the case. Thus, if one party wins the case outright, the court will normally award costs against the unsuccessful party. If each party is only partially successful, the court may apportion the costs or decide that neither party is entitled to costs.
Costs are the costs incurred by the parties in connection with the litigation. In practice, it is not just the court fee for bringing the action itself. Costs may also include other expenses that were necessary for the conduct of the litigation.
The most common may be:
The word purposefully is important. The opposing party cannot automatically claim any expenses unrelated to the dispute. The court assesses which costs were necessary and reasonable.
The court decides who pays the costs. Pursuant to Article 255 of the Civil Procedure Code, the court shall award costs according to the proportion of success of the parties in the case. That is to say, the decisive factor is, in particular, who was successful in the dispute and to what extent. If the plaintiff brings an action and the court upholds it in its entirety, the successful party is the plaintiff. In such a case, the court may order the defendant to pay the plaintiff’s costs. However, if the plaintiff loses the case and the court dismisses the action, the successful party will be the defendant. In that case, the plaintiff may be ordered to pay the defendant’s costs, including lawyer’s fees if they were reasonably incurred.
Not every lawsuit ends in a complete victory for one party. Often, the court will award the plaintiff only part of what he or she sought. For example, if the plaintiff sues for €10,000 but the court awards €5,000, this is not a complete success for either party. In such a case, the court, when deciding on costs, considers the extent to which each party was successful and the extent to which it was unsuccessful. It may apportion the costs between the parties accordingly. In other words, each party may bear a proportion of the costs according to the outcome of the dispute. However, the court may also decide that neither party will be entitled to costs. Therefore, it cannot be automatically assumed that only one party will always pay all the costs. What is crucial is how much of the claim the court awards and how it assesses the success of each party.
Yes, it can happen. If the opposing party succeeds in the litigation and was represented by a lawyer, the court may also award them legal costs. This means that the unsuccessful party may also be required to pay the opposing party’s attorney’s fees. However, this does not automatically mean that you will pay everything that the other party claims. Reimbursement of legal costs is determined according to the Ordinance on Lawyers’ Fees and Indemnities and the court examines whether the costs were reasonable. Thus, the decision does not only take into account the fact that the opposing party had a lawyer, but also what acts were performed in the proceedings and whether they were related to the dispute.
The court decides on the claim for compensation of costs even without a petition, in the decision terminating the proceedings. In other words, a party does not have to specifically request that the court decide who is entitled to costs. The court shall deal with that question as part of the termination of the case. However, the actual amount of the costs is normally determined after the decision has become final. Pursuant to Article 262 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the amount of costs is to be decided by the court of first instance in a separate order made by the judicial officer. For a party, this means that the judgment may first state who is entitled to costs and to what extent. Only then may a separate order be made setting out the specific amount.
Before bringing an action, it is advisable to assess not only whether the allegations you have made are true, but also whether you will be able to prove them in court. In civil litigation, it is not enough just to say that you have a claim. You need to be able to identify the evidence, properly frame your claim and assess what the procedural risks are.
In particular, you can reduce the risk of paying legal costs by checking before filing a lawsuit:
An out-of-court settlement can in many cases be cheaper and quicker than litigation. This is especially true in property disputes, BSM settlements, co-ownership, debts or disputes between former partners or family members. However, each case is individual and it is therefore important to consider the legal and financial risks of proceeding in advance. We will be happy to look at your situation at a paid legal consultation in Highgate and help you assess whether it is more appropriate for you to seek a settlement or proceed to court.
When deciding on the costs, the court does not usually base its decision on how much the client has actually paid to his lawyer. The decisive factor is usually the so-called tariff fee of the lawyer, which is determined according to the Decree of the Ministry of Justice of the Slovak Republic No. 655/2004 Coll., which regulates the lawyer’s remuneration, compensation for out-of-pocket expenses and compensation for loss of time in the provision of legal services.
In practice, this means that even if the client and the lawyer have agreed on an individual price for legal services, the court will base its award of costs to the other party on the fee schedule rules. Therefore, the award of costs may not always correspond exactly to the amount actually paid by the client to the lawyer.
It is therefore important for the client to know that success in litigation does not automatically mean that all costs will be recovered in full. The court assesses which costs were necessary for the effective exercise or defence of the right and only then decides how much to award.
Not necessarily. It is necessary to distinguish between the statutory or tariff fee of the lawyer and the price of the legal service agreed between the client and the lawyer.
Decree No. 655/2004 Coll. regulates the method of determining and the amount of remuneration, reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses and compensation for the loss of the lawyer’s time. It is therefore important for the client to ask in advance not only about the price of the legal service, but also about what part of these costs can realistically be claimed from the other party in the event of success in the dispute. Otherwise, he may be surprised that, even if he wins the lawsuit, he will not get back all the money he actually spent on legal services.
Generally yes, if the opposing party is successful and has incurred reasonable costs. However, the court always decides according to the particular outcome of the dispute and the balance of success between the parties.
Yeah. If the opposing party has been represented by a lawyer and has been successful in the litigation, the court may award him legal costs in an amount to be fixed by decree.
The court shall decide on the claim for costs in the decision terminating the proceedings. The specific amount of compensation shall be decided by the court of first instance by a separate order after the decision has become final.
If you are only partially successful, the court may apportion the costs or decide that neither party is entitled to costs.
It depends on the strength of the claim, the evidence, the value of the dispute and the willingness to risk costs. Before bringing a claim, it is advisable to consult a solicitor who can assess both the chances of success and the potential financial risks.
If you lose the case, the court will usually award costs to the successful party according to the extent of their success in the case. The Civil Procedure Code is based on the rule that the successful party should be reimbursed for costs reasonably incurred.
However, this does not mean that a decision on costs is always unchallengeable. In certain cases, the costs order itself may also be defended against. It is important to distinguish whether you are challenging the entitlement to costs themselves, i.e. whether the other party should be awarded costs at all, or only the amount of the costs awarded. The court already decides on the award of costs in the decision which concludes the proceedings, whereas the specific amount can only be decided subsequently by a separate order of the judicial officer.
However, an appeal or other remedy must have a genuine reason. This may be, for example, where the court has misjudged the success of the parties, failed to take account of partial success, awarded costs that were not necessary or appropriate, or there are exceptional circumstances why costs should not be awarded. The Civil Procedure Code expressly allows the court, exceptionally, not to award costs where there are reasons of special consideration. However, if the order on costs is merely a separate order made by a judicial officer, typically no appeal is lodged, but a complaint is lodged within 15 days of service of the order.
If the court has finally ordered you to pay the other party’s costs, this is no longer just a voluntary request by the other party. It is an obligation arising from a court decision. The Civil Procedure Code is based on the rule that the court will award costs according to the proportion of success of the parties in the case. If the costs are not paid voluntarily, the other party may file a petition for execution. An execution may be filed if the debtor does not voluntarily comply with what the enforcement order, e.g. a court decision, requires him to do.
In practice, this may mean that the original amount is increased by the additional costs associated with the execution. The bailiff will notify you when the execution is started, ask you to comply with the obligation and must also state in the notice the amount of the costs if you pay within 15 days and after this period. Failure to pay the costs can therefore lead, for example, to deductions from your wages, blocking of money in your account or other forms of execution. For monetary claims, the Enforcement Code allows for several methods of enforcement, including deductions from wages, attachment of the claim or sale of the property. If you cannot pay the costs at once, it is advisable to deal with the situation as soon as possible, for example, by communicating with the counterparty or their solicitor and trying to agree on instalments. If the execution has already started, the debtor can ask the executor for instalments under certain conditions. Simply put, if you do not pay the awarded costs, the debt may be enforced and the total costs may increase. It therefore pays to deal with the matter early, especially if you have grounds to dispute the amount of costs or need to agree an instalment plan.
Many people do not litigate not because they do not consider their claim to be legitimate, but because they are worried about the costs, the length of the proceedings and the uncertain outcome. Litigation is not just about the court fee alone. It is also the cost of legal representation, possible expert evidence and the risk that, if unsuccessful, the other party’s costs will also have to be paid. These concerns are not entirely unfounded. Thus, yes, time and costs can discourage people from pursuing legal action. That is why, in many disputes, it is worth considering before bringing a claim whether litigation is economically sensible, what the realistic chances of success are, and whether a quicker or cheaper out-of-court settlement might be an option.
The issue of costs is not just a procedural detail, but a key factor that you should consider before bringing a claim. Although the principle of success on the merits dominates Slovak civil procedure, there are a number of exceptions, ranging from procedural fault to reasons worthy of special consideration, which can unexpectedly change the resulting allocation of costs. A properly set strategy and a realistic estimation of the chances of success are the best prevention against turning a victory in court into an economic loss. At Highgate Law & Tax, we assist clients not only with expert representation, but also with a comprehensive analysis of the costs and risks of litigation. If you are facing litigation or considering pursuing your claims, don’t leave the issue of costs to chance. Contact us to arrange a professional consultation, where we will assess your situation together and propose the most effective solution.
If you are interested in this topic, please do not hesitate to contact us:
For more on property and business protection, please visit the Property and Business Protection section of our website.
If you are interested, you can subscribe to our newsletter for interesting practical legal and tax information.
You can address your specific questions in a consultation with our partner Tomáš Dem, who specializes in the area of sales and investments in companies and commercial law. You can book a consultation here:
Law & Tax
Tomas Demo
tomas.demo@highgate.sk
Accounting
Peter Šopinec
peter.sopinec@highgate.sk
Crypto
Peter Varga
peter.varga@highgate.sk
