Supreme Magistrates of Bulgaria

The interviews were made within the information-educational campaign The Court and We of the Club Journalists Against Corruption with the support of the Strengthening of the Judiciary Project of the Agency for State Internal Control

Lyubka Ilieva-Vandeva, Vice President of the Supreme Court of Cassation, head of the Commercial College

Mrs. Ilieva, could you tell us about the Commercial College with the Supreme Court of Cassation?
The Commercial College with the Supreme Court of Cassation is the newest one – it was established through the amendments to the Judicial System Act, published in State Gazette, No 61 of 2003. The need for such college was imposed by the requirements of the European Commission for stabilization in the sphere of commercial suits. Thus, by decision of the Supreme Judicial Council of February 14, 2001, a team of experts was assembled to hear the cases of bankruptcy, and this is not by accident, given the importance of such cases for this country’s economy – such proceedings declare merchants bankrupt and they are forced to withdraw from the market. The idea of establishing a specialized college with the Supreme Court of Cassation was put forward at the national conference on reforming commercial justice in 2003. Commercial suits serve less directly this country’s economy, as they concern the merchants on the market and their relevant economic interests. Expedition is essential with such proceedings for no matter how precisely a case is decided and how well the decision is written, it loses its actual significance if it is reached too late, while the law is meant to serve life, and commercial proceedings – the trade in this country. That is why the amendments to the Judicial System Act led to the establishment of the Commercial Tribunal. It consists of 16 judges. Out f the 4,684 cases, brought in court in 2005, we heard 3,581, which means an average of 224 cases per judge. In addition to that, since every case is heard by a three-member panel of the court, every judge has actually taken part in the decision of a total of 671 cases. This is a significant workload, but we have the capacity to handle it, and I could say that we succeed, even though it is not easy. The problems we have to face stem from the rapidly changing legislation, and the fact that many laws are not mutually coordinated – some of them even contradict with or cancel each other, and I am not talking about enactments, but about fundamental laws. This imperfection in the text often leads to different possible interpretations, which, for its part, leaves an open door for corruption. Whenever a legal norm can be interpreted in more than one ways, this lead to controversial practices and, naturally, arouses well-founded suspicion among the citizens. That is why our goal is to overcome the antinomy in the practice of the Supreme Court and help the other courts of justice in Bulgaria do the same by being in constant touch with them and providing them with interpretative decisions. I am rather satisfied with the fact that our college consists of so few people, because this allows us to be more efficient and operative, and I would like to point out that the findings of a study into the business show that the Commercial college enjoys sixty-percent credibility with the businesspeople. We do a comparatively good job setting cases for trial – we are currently appointing hearings for May and June, which is rather fast for the Supreme Court of Cassation, or, in other words, we are capable of handling the cases brought in and distribute justice quickly enough. One way or the other, the specialization in question alone is a guarantee for the better quality of the justice system, because focusing our efforts only on this area we can monitor more freely the implementation of this doctrine, make generalizations, confer with each other, make new contacts and summarize our practice, which can lead to a higher quality of jurisdiction.

Your college hears cases of great economic interest, which the business expects to be decided rapidly, as they all have to do with money, after all. How fast do commercial suits come to your attention and how fast does the Supreme Court of Cassation decide such cases, after they have been brought in?
Cases of bankruptcy are usually tried quicker and the instances, mainly the Regional Court, which is the highest instance, only take several months to consider them. On the other hand, there are sometimes very complicated cases, which are heard at first instance for as long as a year. On the average, a normal commercial case where there are no problems of summoning takes about two years, decision of the Supreme Court included. But these are cases, heard by three instances, while there is another category, which are only considered by two. The whole process is slow indeed, but such is the situation in almost all European countries, and that is why I think that the criticisms about the lengthiness of our justice system are not well-grounded. Our Civil Procedure Code, which established the three-instance system, actually led to the slowing down of our jurisdiction, but I expect the whole procedure to be less time-consuming after the Code is amended.

In other words, you expect certain cases to be heard by two instances only?
Yes, I do. This was done successfully with the cases of bankruptcy – they are only heard by a regional court, as a first instance, and then by the court of cassation – as a second one. I think that many of the commercial cases could be only considered by a court of appeal, respectively a regional court, in two instances. Those cases have to do with the cancellation of decisions taken at general meetings of associations and cooperative societies, where it is mostly a matter of facts, there are no legal complications, and the facts in question are better verified by the court. This gives the court a better idea of the situation, allows it to examine witnesses and proof, and thus enforce the law more rightly than we would, for we merely judge by the written records of the proceedings.

How far has the reform in commercial suits gone, and what is still needed so that you start working more efficiently and the business is satisfied? New laws were passed recently, which provide for alternative methods of settling arguments. What is the future of commercial law in Bulgaria?
The alternative methods of settling civil and commercial lawsuits have been applied since recently in Bulgaria, and I think this is a possible way to reduce the work-load of the courts of law, and if the parties concerned manage to reach an agreement, be it through arbitrage or through mediation, this would decrease the pressure of the vast bulk of cases on the courts, but, again, this is a matter of agreement between the parties concerned. That is why I welcome these law reforms, as they will alleviate the work of courts. As far as commerce legislation is concerned, the changes in the trade register would also be a relief if they are, like I said in the beginning, well made and coordinated with our legislation and the legislation of the EU, for we must bear in mind the challenge which will be the direct implementation of European laws and the practice of the European courts.

This is another interesting topic – in a year’s time you will have to deliver judgments on cases, related to the business interests of foreigners. Are you ready for this job?
We already work with foreign juridical persons, but given the references to the private international law, it is rear that we invoke foreign legislation. After Bulgaria’s accession to the EU, we will have to implement it directly. I do not think that we are sufficiently prepared, and we have to concentrate our efforts on this pending task. We have to broaden our knowledge and think of a way to establish some sort of body to consult the court, prepare the respective literature and jurisprudence. Its initial function will consist of alleviating our work by summarizing the jurisprudence, concerning the various categories of cases, because at this stage we are not ready to administer justice directly – neither do we have the literature in question at hand, nor the jurisprudence of the courts of law has been summarized. That is why we must work in this line – we must come up with an idea rather quickly and put it to practice afterwards. Foreign experts also question the ability of Bulgaria’s justice system to react adequately to the problems and challenges arising with our accession to the EU.