Litigation is the principal method of resolving disputes in Cyprus. Arbitration and mediation are also available as alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. Domestic arbitral proceedings are governed by the Arbitration Law, Cap. 4 while international arbitral proceedings are governed by the International Arbitration in Commercial Matters Law of 1987 which is based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. Although litigation remains the most frequently used method of resolving commercial disputes, parties are increasingly turning to arbitration, primarily because of the delays in the processing of court cases. With respect to mediation, despite the fact that Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters was implemented in Cyprus with the enactment of the Certain Aspects of Mediation in Civil Matters Law of 2012, mediation is not widely used as an alternative method of resolving disputes.

Civil procedure in Cyprus is mainly governed by new, fully-fledged set of Civil Procedure Rules which entered into force on 1 September 2023 (the “New Civil Procedure Rules”) and apply with respect to civil commercial cases filed after 1 September 2023. The New Civil Procedure Rules, which are intended to promote a radical change in civil litigation culture through the introduction of the “overriding objective” of dealing with cases justly and at proportionate cost as well as provisions intended to encourage the use of Alterative Disputes Resolution and enhance the courts’ case management powers,  regulate most aspects of civil litigation including, inter alia, the commencement and service of the proceedings, pleadings, interlocutory applications, discovery, proceedings at trial and appeals. Certain aspects of civil procedure, including, inter alia, the granting of interim relief and the execution of judgments, are also regulated by the Courts of Justice Law of 1960 and the Civil Procedure Law, Cap.6. The old Civil Procedure Rules, which are based on the English Civil Procedural Rules of 1954, (the “Old Civil Procedure Rules”) continue to apply with respect to all civil and commercial cases filed before 1 September 2023 so they will continue to be relevant for quite some time.

All commercial claims are currently initiated in a District Court. There are five District Courts in Cyprus, one for each geographic district (Nicosia, Limassol, Paphos, Larnaca and Famagusta). There are three ranks of judges in each District Court, namely District Judges, Senior Judges and Presidents of the District Court. Upon filing, a claim will be allocated to a judge based on the value of the claim. As part of a major overhaul of the Cypriot court system, two new specialised courts, a Commercial Court and an Admiralty Court, have been established by statute in 2022 but have not yet began to try cases as the process of appointing the judges who will serve on these courts has not been concluded. The Commercial Court (which is modelled on the Commercial Court of Ireland) will have jurisdiction over all commercial claims in excess of €2.000.000 arising out of contracts or other commercial documents, sale of goods, insurance, operation of financial markets, vehicle manufacturing et al. Additionally, it will have jurisdiction to hear all competition, arbitration and intellectual property related matters, irrespective of the amount of the dispute. It will be composed of 5 judges who will be appointed by the Supreme Council of Judicature. The Admiralty Court, which will consist of 2 judges, will have exclusive jurisdiction to hear admiralty claims relating to a vessel or an aircraft and issues of ownership, possession, mortgage or charge and damage caused by or to a vessel or loss of life.

The final court of appeal is the new Supreme Court of Cyprus. An intermediate appellate court composed of 16 judges (the new Court of Appeal) has been established in 2022 and has began to try appeals from 1 July 2023.  The establishment of the new Court of Appeal has significantly reduced the time required for appeals in commercial cases to be determined.

The length of time between commencement of proceedings and trial varies considerably depending, inter alia, on the nature of the proceedings, the District Court in which the proceedings are commenced and the workload of the particular judge to whom the proceedings are assigned. The level of backlogs in litigious civil and commercial cases is quite high and often results in serious delays in the processing of cases. On average the period between commencement of proceedings and trial at first instance is currently around five years.

One of the main aims of the overhaul of the Cypriot court system, which includes, among other things, the introduction of the New Civil Procedure Rules, the establishment of new specialised courts, the introduction of measures to deal with “backlog” cases and the introduction of an electronic filing and case management system, is to deal with the perennial problem of delays in the processing of civil and commercial cases. It is hoped and expected that these measures in combination with the determined efforts to promote a radical change in litigation culture will gradually lead to a significant reduction of the length of time between commencement of proceedings and trial.

Article 30 of the Constitution of the Republic of Cyprus, which entrenches the right of every person to a public hearing, provides that the public may be excluded from all or any part of a hearing upon a decision of the court where it is in the interest of the security of the Republic, the constitutional order, public order, the public safety or public morals or where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require as well as in special circumstances where, in the opinion of the court, publicity would prejudice the interests of justice. In practice all commercial proceedings in Cyprus are held in public. Documents filed at court are not available to the public and are generally only available to the parties to the proceedings. However, a third party may apply to the court for permission to inspect the court’s file of particular civil proceedings and obtain copies of documents and may be granted such permission, on such terms as the court deems fit, upon showing a legitimate interest.

The Limitation of Actions Law of 2012 (Law 66(I)/2012) (the “Limitation Law”) provides for different limitation periods depending on the nature of the claim. The general limitation period for claims founded in tort or contract is 6 years, although shorter limitation periods apply in respect of specific torts (such as defamation (1 year), malicious falsehood (1 year), negligence (3 years), nuisance (3 years) and breach of statutory duty (3 years)). The courts have the power to extend the prescribed limitation periods by up to two years if they consider this to be just and reasonable in the circumstances, subject to the proviso that no claim can be brought after the expiration of 10 years from the date on which the relevant cause of action is completed. In general, the prescribed limitation periods begin to run from the time the cause of action is completed or from 1 January 2016, whichever time is latest. The Limitation Law also contains provisions regarding the circumstances in which the running of the prescribed limitation periods may be postponed or suspended as well as transitional provisions with respect to causes of actions based on facts occurring before 1 July 2012 when the Limitation Law entered into force. It should be noted that the provisions of the Limitation Law do not affect the limitation periods in respect of specific types of claims that are prescribed in other statutes, such as the statutes governing liability for defective products, the administration of estates and the specific performance of contracts for the sale of land.

Under the Old Civil Procedure Rules there were no pre-action conduct requirements with respect to civil and commercial claims. However, the New Civil Procedure Rules have introduced such requirements and include “Pre-action Protocols” which are generally required to be followed in all types of claims before legal proceedings are commenced, with special rules applying to specific types of claims (namely claims for a liquidated sum, claims arising from road traffic accidents and personal injury claims).  The pre-action conduct requirements introduced by the New Civil Procedure Rules vary depending on the nature of the claim and include requirements concerning the exchange of correspondence clearly setting out the nature and factual basis of the potential claim/potential defence and the exchange of information and key documents as well as requirements concerning the appointment of joint experts in personal injury claims. The new Civil Procedure Rules have also introduced a general requirement for the parties to follow a “reasonable procedure” before commencing legal proceedings with a view to avoiding litigation.

A party’s failure to comply with the relevant pre-action conduct requirements is taken into account by the court in providing case management directions and in awarding costs, the general idea being that the non-complying party will normally be ordered to pay the costs relating to any steps taken or required to be taken as a result of the non-compliance.

Under the New Civil Procedure Rules civil and commercial proceedings are now generally commenced by means of a “Part 7 Claim Form”.  By way of exception, a “Part 8 Claim Form” may be used in cases where the facts are not expected to be disputed and/or where the proceedings are required by law to be commenced by originating summons, petition or some other form of originating document. In either case, the claim form is required to be served on every defendant, subject to the power of the court to dispense with service in exceptional circumstances. Τhe New Civil Procedure Rules do not introduce any fundamental changes with respect to the manner service. Service by licensed private process-servers instructed by the parties is expected to continue to be the main method of service of Claim Forms and other documents required to be served.

If a claim before a Cypriot court is directed against a defendant not domiciled in Cyprus or has other “foreign elements” (e.g., if the facts giving rise to the dispute occurred outside Cyprus) the court will determine whether it has jurisdiction over the claim by applying either the provisions of the Recast Brussels I Regulation (Regulation EU No. 1215/2012) or the national rules concerning jurisdiction. Most commercial disputes fall within the scope of application of the Brussels I Regulation. Generally, the determining factor of jurisdiction under the Brussels I regime is the domicile of the defendant. As a general rule, the court will have jurisdiction where the defendant is domiciled in Cyprus, subject to the provisions of the Recast Brussels I Regulation regarding exclusive jurisdiction, prorogation of jurisdiction and lis pendens. If the defendant is not domiciled in Cyprus the court may have jurisdiction over the claim pursuant to the provisions of the Recast Brussels I Regulation regarding exclusive jurisdiction (e.g. if the claim concerns immovable property located in Cyprus, or the validity of a decision of the directors or the shareholders of a Cypriot company), special jurisdiction (e.g. if the claim concerns a civil wrong committed in Cyprus or a contractual obligation performed or due to be performed in Cyprus) and prorogation of jurisdiction (e.g. if the parties agreed that their dispute would be subject to the jurisdiction of the Cypriot courts). In summary, the national rules concerning jurisdiction permit a Cypriot court to assume jurisdiction over a claim directed against a defendant not domiciled in Cyprus or having other “foreign elements” if the writ of summons is served on the defendant in Cyprus, if the defendant submits to the jurisdiction of the Cypriot court or (in respect of claims directed against defendants not domiciled in Cyprus) if the conditions set out in the Civil Procedure Rules for the granting of permission to serve the claim out of the jurisdiction are satisfied (generally these require a connection with Cyprus). Under the national rules, the court has a discretion to stay a claim over which it has jurisdiction if it is satisfied that the courts of another state are “clearly and distinctly” a more appropriate forum for the trial of the action. If the Cypriot courts have jurisdiction over a claim, the question of which specific District Court has jurisdiction is determined with reference to the provisions of the Courts of Justice Law of 1960 regarding territorial jurisdiction.

With respect to contractual obligations, the Cypriot courts will apply the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (“Rome I”), which establishes uniform rules for the purposes of determining the applicable law to contractual obligations in civil and commercial matters throughout the European Union. Subject to certain safeguards, Rome I upholds the freedom of the parties to choose the applicable law. Where the parties have not chosen the applicable law, the applicable law is generally determined with reference to the nature of the contract. With respect to non-contractual obligations, the Cypriot courts will apply the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 on the law applicable to noncontractual obligations (“Rome II”). In cases not falling within the scope of application of Rome I or Rome II, the Cypriot courts will apply the common law rules concerning the determination of the applicable law and their own case law.

Under the Old Civil Procedure Rules a claim may be disposed of without a full trial in a variety of circumstances. Judgment in default may be issued if the defendant fails to file a memorandum of appearance or fails to file a defence within the period prescribed by the Civil Procedure Rules (which is frequently extended by the court). Except in cases where proceedings are initiated by filing a generally indorsed writ of summons, the plaintiff may apply for summary judgment on the basis of an affidavit made by himself, or by any other person who can swear positively to the facts, verifying the cause of action and the amount claimed (if any), and stating that in his/her belief there is no defence to the action. The court will issue a summary judgment if it is satisfied that the defendant has no arguable defence and that there are is no other reason for permitting the case to go to trial. Furthermore, the court may strike out a claim or defence which has no real prospect of success, or is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious or may prejudice embarrass or delay the fair trial of the action or is otherwise an abuse of the process of the court. In cases where the determination of a point of law raised by the pleadings is likely to effectively determine the outcome of the proceedings, the court may determine the point of law as a preliminary issue and proceed to dismiss the claim or make such other order as may be just. Finally, a claim may be dismissed if the plaintiff fails to file a Statement of Claim within the period prescribed by the Civil Procedure Rules (which is frequently extended by the courts) or deliberately and unjustifiably fails to comply with any order of the court (e.g., an order for discovery of documents). Generally, the Cypriot courts use the powers enabling them to dispose of proceedings without a full trial very sparingly.

The New Civil Procedure Rules also contain provisions regarding the issuance of judgment in default in the event that the Defendant fails to file a Notice of Appearance or Defence in proceedings commenced by means of a “Part 7 Claim Form” within the prescribed deadlines. Furthermore, under the New Civil Procedure Rules, the court has the power to issue a summary judgment not only against the defendant (in cases where the Court is satisfied that the Defendant does not have a reasonable prospect of successfully defending the claim) but also against the plaintiff (in cases where the Court is satisfied that the claim has no reasonable prospect of success). The New Civil Procedure Rules also give very wide powers to the court to determine any legal or factual issue as a preliminary issue and to dismiss a claim or issue judgment on a claim following such determination as well as to strike out a claim or a defence in cases where the claim/defence is manifestly unfounded or abusive or in cases where the plaintiff/defendant fails to comply with an order of the court. It expected that the disposal of claims without a full trial will become considerably more frequent under the New Civil Procedure Rules.

The Cypriot courts have very wide powers to grant interim relief in support of civil and commercial claims. The main types of interim injunctions and orders granted by the Cypriot court are the following: (i) Freezing orders (also known as “Mareva injunctions”) preventing a defendant from using or dissipating all or part of his/her assets (including assets located outside Cyprus) pending the determination of the plaintiffs’ claim; (ii) Orders (known as “ancillary disclosure orders”) ordering the disclosure of a defendant’s assets for the purpose of policing a freezing order granted against the defendant; (iii) Disclosure of information orders (also known as “Norwich Pharmacal orders”) ordering a person who is mixed up in wrongdoing to disclose information and/or documents in order to enable the applicant to bring legal proceedings in respect of the wrongdoing (e.g. by enabling him/her to identify the wrongdoers or obtain vital information concerning the wrongdoing) and/or trace misappropriated assets; (iv) Search orders (also known as “Anton Piller orders”) requiring persons who are in control of premises situated in Cyprus to (a) permit an independent “Supervising Advocate” and the applicant’s representatives to enter such premises for the purpose of searching them and removing documents and/or obtaining information (including from electronic devices found in the premises) relating to specific matters and (b) inform the Supervising Advocate where such documents and/or information may be found. (v) Orders (known as “Chabra orders”) preventing a person against whom the applicant has no cause of action or claim (such as a person who holds assets as a trustee, agent or “nominee” of a wrongdoer against whom the applicant has brought a claim) from dissipating assets under his/her control or administration which may become available to satisfy a judgment which may be obtained by the applicant against the wrongdoer; (vi) Orders ordering the appointment of an interim receiver for the purpose of ensuring the preservation of the defendant’s assets and/or the defendant’s compliance with the freezing order; (vii) “Quia timet” injunctions which are “pre-emptive” injunctions intended to prevent the commission of a wrong or the violation of the applicant’s rights in circumstances where an act amounting to a wrong or a violation of the applicant’s rights is threatened. The granting of interim relief always lies within the discretion of the court. In order for the court to exercise its discretion the plaintiff- applicant must establish, by presenting strong evidence by way of affidavit, that he/she has a good arguable case on the merits and that, unless the relief is granted, it will be difficult or impossible for complete justice to be done at a later stage. The court must also be satisfied, after weighing the likely consequences of granting and not granting the relief sought, that it is “just and convenient” to grant the interim relief. Interim relief may be granted on an ex-parte basis (i.e., without notice to the defendant/respondent) in cases of urgency or where there are other special circumstances justify the granting of relief on an ex-parte basis. The Cypriot courts have the power to grant interim relief in support of proceedings instituted in Cyprus as well as in support of proceedings instituted abroad and contemplated or pending international arbitral proceedings.

Under the Old Civil Procedure Rules, the defendant must file a memorandum of appearance stating his/her intention to defend the claim within 10 days of service of the writ of summons unless a longer period is stipulated in a court order (such as an order permitting the service of the claim out of the jurisdiction). If the writ of summons is generally indorsed (i.e., if it does not include a Statement of Claim) the plaintiff must proceed to file a Statement of Claim within 10 days from the date of filing of the defendant’s memorandum of appearance. The defendant must file a Defence (whereby he/she may also set up a counterclaim) within 14 days from the date of service of the writ of summons (where the statement of claim is included in the writ of summons) or from the date of filing of the Statement of Claim (where the writ of summons is generally indorsed). Once a Defence is filed and served on the plaintiff, the plaintiff may file a Reply (and, where a counterclaim is brought, a Defence to the Counterclaim) within 7 days from the date of service of the Reply. No subsequent pleadings may be filed unless the court orders otherwise. The prescribed periods for filing pleadings are very frequently extended by the court. Once the pleadings are deemed to be closed, the plaintiff (as well as the defendant in cases where a counterclaim is brought) must, within 90 days, issue and serve a Summons for Directions setting out the matters (e.g., disclosure and discovery of documents, provision of further and better particulars in respect of any pleading, amendment of any pleading) in respect of which he/she wishes the court to give directions before a trial date is set. The defendant must also file a corresponding notice in prescribed form within 30 days of being served with the Summons for Directions. At the hearing of the Summons for Directions, the court gives such directions as it considers fit and orders the parties to file a list of the witnesses they propose to call at trial and provide a summary of the evidence to be given by each witness. Upon providing directions the court also sets the time frames for compliance with the relevant directions. Once the court’s directions are complied with and lists of witnesses and summaries of evidence are submitted by the parties, the court proceeds to set a trial date.

Under the New Civil Procedure Rules, when proceedings are commenced by means of a “Part 7 Claim Form”, the defendant is required to file a Memorandum of Appearance within 14 days from the date of service of the claim form or, in cases where the claim form does not include a Statement of Claim, from the date of service of the Statement of Claim. The defendant is then required to file a Defence within 28 days from the date of filing of the Memorandum of Appearance. This deadline may be extended by agreement between the parties for a maximum period of 42 days. If the plaintiff wishes to file a Reply, he/she must do so with 14 days from the date of service of the Defence. Although the court will continue to have the power to extend the deadlines prescribed by the Rules, it is expected that extensions will only be granted for good reason. Once the pleadings are closed a date for holding a Case Management Conference is fixed by the court registry. When proceedings are commenced by means of a “Part 8 Claim Form” the defendant is required to file a Memorandum of Appearance within 14 days from the date of service of the claim form and an “opposition” to the claim supported by evidence within 28 days thereafter.

Under the Old Civil Procedure Rules, the parties to civil proceedings may be required to disclose all documents in their possession, custody or power which relate to the proceedings whether they intend to rely on such documents or not. Such disclosure generally entails filing a list of documents verified by an affidavit confirming that the party making the disclosure has no other relevant documents in his custody or power. Privileged documents are required to be included in the list of disclosed documents but the party making the disclosure may object to their production. Privileged documents include documents covered by legal professional privilege or legal advice privilege, “without prejudice” correspondence and documents privileged on public policy grounds.

The New Civil Procedure Rules introduce a distinction between “General Disclosure” (covering documents on which the disclosing party intends to rely or which are necessary to enable the other parties to understand the disclosing party’s case) and “Specific Disclosure” (covering documents which are in the possession or control of the disclosing party and which may support or adversely affect the case of any other party). Under the New Civil Procedure Rules, all parties are required to proceed with “General Disclosure” at least 14 days before the date fixed for holding a Case Management Conference.  Once the process of “General Disclosure” is completed, any party may serve a Request requiring any other party to proceed with “Specific Disclosure”, subject to being able to indicate valid reasons for believing that such other party has in his/her possession documents which may support or adversely affect the case of one or more of the parties in the proceedings. The party to whom a Request for “Specific Disclosure” is addressed is entitled to object to the whole or any part of such a Request on a number of specified grounds including lack of relevance, privilege, loss or destruction of the relevant document(s), public interest and imperative confidentiality.

Under the Old Civil Procedure Rules, evidence in support of interim applications (including applications for interim relief) is given by affidavit but the court may order the attendance of the deponent for cross-examination. At trial witnesses can either give their evidence orally or submit a written statement. Where a written statement is submitted, the witness is required to attend court and adopt the content of his/her witness statement on oath. Each party has the right to cross-examine the opposing party’s witnesses at trial. Following the conclusion of the cross-examination the witness may be re-examined by the party calling the witness in relation to the evidence given by the witness in the course of his/her cross-examination. Depositions are permitted if the court permits the taking of the deposition. A deposition can only be used at trial if the party on whose application the order permitting the taking of the deposition was made gave sufficient notice to all other parties to attend the examination of the deponent.

Under the New Civil Procedure Rules, evidence in support of interim applications (including applications for interim relief) continues to be given by affidavit or by written witness statements (depending on the nature of the application), subject to the power of the court to order the attendance of the witness for cross-examination. In proceedings commenced by a “Part 7 Claim Form”, evidence at trial must be given by means of written witness statements which must be submitted and served in advance. As a rule the witnesses must then appear before the court for cross-examination.  Proceedings commenced by a “Part 8 Claim Form” will, as a rule, be determined on the basis of the written evidence accompanying the claim form and the opposition respectively subject to the Court’s power to order the attendance of a witness for cross-examination (which is expected to be exercised sparingly).

Expert evidence is permitted. The Old Civil Procedure Rules do not contain any provisions regulating the presentation of expert evidence or the duties of experts. As a rule, each party appoints its own expert witness(es) but the parties may agree to jointly appoint a single expert. The court has the power to summon an expert witness on its own motion but this power is rarely exercised.

The New Civil Procedure Rules contain elaborate provisions governing the way in which expert evidence can be adduced and introduce significant changes in relation to the court’s role by giving greater control over expert evidence to judges. Under the New Civil Procedure Rules expert evidence can only be adduced with the court’s permission which is to be given only if the court is persuaded that the evidence proposed to be adduced will assist the court and that the granting of permission to adduce such evidence would be consistent with the “overriding objective”. As a rule expert evidence must be given in a written report unless the court directs otherwise.

Expert witnesses have a duty to provide objective and impartial evidence on matters that fall within their area of expertise enabling the court to judge the accuracy of their conclusions and to formulate an independent view on their application to the facts. Expert evidence must be provided with clarity and detail, in an understandable language and without complicated professional technical terms as well as with care and skill and in compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules and the code of ethics. Expert witnesses’ reports are usually provided to the other party prior to the trial and the witnesses are subsequently offered for cross examination.

Under both the current and the New Civil Procedure Rules all interim and final decisions can be appealed as of right (there is no leave requirement). Appeals against interim decisions must be brought within 14 days from the date of the interim decision. Appeals against final decisions must be brought within 42 days from the date of the final decision. The prescribed periods for bringing appeals may, in exceptional cases, be extended by order of the court.

As from 3 July 2023 all appeals against decisions issued in civil and commercial cases are made to the new Court of Appeal.

The procedure for enforcing foreign judgments in Cyprus depends on where the foreign judgment was given. Judgments given in civil and commercial matters by the courts of EU member states or the courts of Norway, Switzerland and Iceland are enforceable in Cyprus pursuant to the provisions of the Recast Brussels I Regulation (Regulation EU) No. 1215/2012) and the Lugano Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments. Furthermore, the Republic of Cyprus is a party to a number of bilateral treaties for the mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments. The countries with which the Republic of Cyprus has concluded such treaties include Russia, Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus, Montenegro, Serbia, Egypt and Syria. Judgments originating from such countries may be recognised and enforced in Cyprus in accordance with the procedure and subject to the exceptions and qualifications stipulated in the relevant treaty. Judgments given in certain Commonwealth countries in civil matters are enforceable in Cyprus pursuant to the provisions of the Mutual Recognition of Certain Judgments of the Courts of Commonwealth Countries Law, Cap. 10. Notwithstanding Brexit, judgments given in the United Kingdom continue to be enforceable in Cyprus pursuant to the provisions of this Law. Final and conclusive judgments for a definite sum given by a court having jurisdiction in a country other than those mentioned above, may be enforced in Cyprus by bringing an action at common law on the basis of the foreign judgment.

The courts have a wide discretion with regard to costs. As a rule, the costs are awarded to the successful party. However, the costs awarded are currently calculated with reference to the amounts set out in the Regulations issued by the Supreme Court of Cyprus (which are linked to the amount of the claim before the Court). These amounts are low and usually represent only a fraction of the successful party’s actual costs in complex, high value commercial disputes.

The New Civil Procedure Rules contain more detailed provisions as to the kind of costs orders that the court may make and the factors which the court should take into account in exercising its discretion and  introduce the general principle that an ultimately successful litigant may (and indeed should) be ordered to bear or even pay  to the unsuccessful litigant any proportion of the total costs that may be attributed to the successful litigant’s unreasonable or unjustified conduct before and/or during the proceedings.

The Old Civil Procedure Rules do not permit class actions. However, where there are numerous persons having the same interest in a cause or matter, one or more of such persons may be authorised by the court to sue or defend in such cause or matter, as a representative and for the benefit of all interested persons. The substantive position remains the same under the New Civil Procedure Rules.

Under the Old Civil Procedure Rules the court may, at any stage of the proceedings, either on the application of the plaintiff or the defendant or of its own motion, order that any parties who ought to have been joined, or whose presence before the Court may be necessary in order to enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the proceedings, be added as parties. Furthermore, a defendant who has a claim against any person not already a party to the proceedings (a “third party” ) which is related or connected with the subject matter of the proceedings or raised any question or issue relating to or connected with the subject matter of the should properly be determined not only as between the plaintiff and the defendant but as between the plaintiff, the defendant and the third party or between any or either of them, may apply to the court for permission to  join such third party as an additional party to the proceedings. Where two or more sets of proceedings pending in the same court involve a common question of law or fact the proceedings may be consolidated if the court is satisfied that the common questions of law or fact are of such importance in proportion to the rest of the matters involved in the proceedings as to render it desirable that the proceedings should be consolidated. Where proceedings are consolidated, the court usually directs that the plaintiff or plaintiffs who first commenced proceedings shall have the conduct of the consolidated action. The New Civil Procedure Rules contain similar or analogous provisions.

It is unclear whether third party funding is permitted in Cyprus as this matter has not yet been determined or considered by the Cypriot courts. Given that, as a rule, a costs order cannot be issued against a person who is not a party to the proceedings, even if third party funding is held to be permitted, it is unlikely that a Cypriot court would make a third-party funder liable for the costs incurred by the other side.

The immediate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on civil litigation was negative as the absence of the necessary infrastructure to enable the courts to adopt remote hearings resulted in most hearings being adjourned. Normal court business was suspended in March and again in December 2020, resulting in significant additional delays in the progress of civil proceedings. However in the longer term , the COVID-19 pandemic has also had a number of positive effects on civil litigation, such as expediting the introduction of  the electronic filing and case management system “iJustice” (as further described below in the answer to question 26) and encouraging the courts to adopt  practices which have remained in place because of their positive effect in terms of saving time,  such as permitting communications with judges, the provision of directions and the delivery of written submissions with respect to interlocutory applications by email so as to limit unnecessary attendances in court

Given that Cyprus has been an established centre for international business for many years, Cypriot judges and legal practitioners have extensive experience in dealing with complex international commercial disputes. Arguably the main advantage of litigating such disputes in Cyprus is the readiness of the Cypriot courts to grant effective interim relief, especially in cases involving fraud or other serious wrongdoing. The main disadvantage are the often-inordinate delays in the processing of civil and commercial cases. As noted above, one of the main aims of the major judicial reforms which are currently in the process of being implemented, is to significantly reduce these delays and to build a modern, fast and effective court system.

Intellectual Property, data protection and energy-related claims are three areas likely to see more growth, as well as a shift away from classical litigation to arbitration / mediation.

Technology has already had a significant impact on the way practitioners operate and litigate claims. However, technology has not as yet been fully applied to the way cases are conducted (such as minute taking, electronic filings, Court lists, service of documents) and in this respect technology can play an important part in streamlining and expediting processes with a corresponding impact on the average length (duration) of litigations and the burden on the Court Registry.  The “iJustice” electronic filing and case management system went online (became operational) in early 2022. The features of iJustice include the electronic filing and handling of documents, the payment of fees, record keeping, the downloading of true copies and electronic (online) case tracking and management. In addition, the iJustice electronic platform shall maintain an electronic register of cases which have been filed and, where applicable, availability of electronic correspondence and communication with the Courts.