It is well known that the legal system in Greece changes frequently, which complicates matters for legal professionals as well as everyday life. However, some institutions remain consistently stable over time, such as legal remedies. The most well-known legal remedy is the appeal, which exists in all types of trials, regardless of their subject matter. In this text, we will look at the basic characteristics of this legal remedy to avoid doubts and prevent misinterpretations in practice.

1.What does the term mean?

The term “appeal” refers to a legal remedy by which a party requests a higher court to review their case from the beginning, based on an initial error that, as they claim, is present in the decision that was issued. This means that with the filing of the appeal, the case is retried fully and completely. If the party’s appeal is accepted by the court, then the court annuls the previously issued decision, and a new judicial decision will be issued.

To file an appeal against a decision, the party must have what is called a “legitimate interest,” meaning that they must have suffered a defeat or harm from the judicial decision—either their claim was dismissed or a claim against them was upheld. As explicitly provided by law, even if the party won the case, they are entitled to appeal the decision if the latter still harms them.

Finally, it must be possible to appeal against the specific judicial decision. This is because the law prohibits the right to appeal in certain categories of decisions (to expedite the resolution of less significant cases). Such prohibitions exist for decisions on provisional measures, which we discussed in another text, as well as for decisions issued in small claims cases where the monetary amounts sought do not exceed the threshold of 5,000 euros.

2.What is the deadline for filing an appeal today?

Since it is crucial for a party to know until when they are entitled to file a legal remedy, the law ensures that this point is clear. More specifically, it stipulates that the appeal deadline is 30 days from when the decision is served to the party wishing to file the appeal. The date of service is certain, as it is easily derived from the proof of service accompanying the decision, which is in the possession of the bailiff who performs the service.

Additionally, there is a two-year deadline to file an appeal against a first-instance court decision, provided that the decision was not served by any party (otherwise, the aforementioned deadline applies). This two-year period starts from the day following the publication of the decision, a date which is indicated in the decision’s text itself.

The appeal deadline is automatically suspended during the period from August 1st to 31st (this applies only to the 30-day appeal deadline) and may also be suspended for reasons of force majeure, upon the request of the party filing the appeal late. In this request, the party must explain and prove to the court the reasons why they were unreasonably prevented by unforeseen events from submitting the appeal within the deadline.

3.What are the grounds for filing an appeal?

What distinguishes an appeal as a legal remedy is that there are no specific grounds required to file it. In other words, any legal or factual error in the decision can be a reason for appeal, allowing the party to seek its annulment and the retrial of the case at the appellate level.

The error could involve the court’s assessment of the evidence, with the party basing their appeal on this ground. However, the reason cited by the party in their appeal must be capable of supporting the annulment of the decision—the party must anticipate some benefit through this reason for the appeal against the first-instance decision.

For example, grounds for appeal that cannot be accepted are those related to the legal costs incurred by the party, without making any reference to the substance of the case in the appeal. Similarly, when the court has included additional details in its decision that do not pertain to the substance of the case but are merely redundant, the party cannot base their appeal solely on the fact that the court mentioned elements in the case that do not ultimately affect its judgment.

4.What can the higher court decide?

As mentioned at the beginning of the text, the appellate court has certain powers granted by law when dealing with a party’s appeal. First and foremost, it can dismiss the party’s appeal as unfounded if the grounds of the appeal are not proven or are not deemed sufficient to support the annulment of the decision. The same applies if the appeal was filed late or if it does not meet one of the legal requirements.

Alternatively, the appellate court can accept the party’s appeal as valid and proceed to annul the decision issued at the first level. In this case, the court will retain the case and judge it itself—it will not refer the case back to another court but will retry it from the beginning in the Court of Appeal. In this context, the Court of Appeal has all the powers granted to a court by law concerning its judgment on the case.

If the Court of Appeal takes up the case for judgment, it has the right to worsen the position of the party that filed the appeal. Since the case is being retried from scratch, the court may reduce the amount awarded to the party by the first-instance court, accept an objection raised by the opposing party, or even entirely dismiss the claim initially filed by the appellant.

5.When is the decision’s effect suspended?

Regarding the suspension of a decision’s effect, certain clarifications are necessary to avoid misunderstandings from what is commonly heard in daily life. The decision’s effect is suspended by law only during the appeal period—30 days if the decision has been served, and two years if it has not been served by either party to the other, as mentioned earlier regarding appeal deadlines.

This means that during the appeal’s adjudication, the decision is not suspended and can be executed normally if the party meets the legal conditions. If the decision is executed and the party’s appeal is later accepted (resulting in the decision being retroactively annulled), then that party may file a compensation claim against the opponent to recover what was paid due to the decision’s execution.

Moreover, even if the decision has been declared provisionally enforceable—meaning it can be executed without an appeal being filed yet—the law protects third parties who are not involved in the trial. It stipulates that, although the decision is provisionally enforceable, it cannot be executed against a third party as an exception. A classic example is a decision issued by a creditor against a general partnership, which cannot be enforced against a general partner until the decision becomes final.

6.What requests can I make to the Court of Appeal?

To avoid irrelevant claims being presented in court, the law sets certain restrictions on the arguments that a party can raise in the Court of Appeal:

• If a party is defending against the appeal filed by the opposing party, they can present any arguments that help maintain the decision of the first-instance court.
• A party cannot introduce a new argument in the Court of Appeal that was not raised in the first-instance court.
• The same applies to counterclaims: a counterclaim cannot be filed for the first time in the Court of Appeal.
• However, a party has the right to make ancillary requests related to the main claim they filed in the first-instance court.
• For example, if the party initially requested the return of a car from the opposing party, and the car was subsequently destroyed, they can request compensation for the destruction of the car in the Court of Appeal.
• The party can also introduce arguments in the Court of Appeal that were not raised at the first level due to a justified reason (e.g., because the deadline for filing submissions had passed).
• This also applies to arguments supported by documents or by the judicial admission of the opposing party.

7.Can I bring new evidence to the appellate court?

The law is lenient towards parties who might not have submitted all the necessary evidence in the first-instance court. It allows parties to present new evidence in the Court of Appeal without any restriction. Of course, parties can also submit the evidence they had previously presented in the first-instance court, even if it has already been examined.

However, the Court of Appeal has the discretion to reject new evidence submitted by the parties if they could have objectively presented that evidence in the first-instance court but failed to do so. The law requires that the failure to submit the evidence was not for the purpose of delaying the case or due to gross negligence—something that is difficult to prove in practice, which is why this provision is rarely used.

It is essential that the evidence submitted to the Court of Appeal must have been obtained legally, without violating others’ personal data, and without involving fraud or threats against the opposing party. If the evidence was obtained illegally, the court is obliged to reject it entirely, and there may be legal consequences for the parties who acquired the evidence through unlawful means.

8.What if I was absent from the first-instance court?

It is possible that a party was absent during the proceedings at the first-instance court, either because their lawyer did not file submissions, they were not represented by a lawyer at all, or their lawyer failed to file the required judicial stamp for the claim’s hearing, among other reasons. In this case, the question arises as to what the party who was absent (default judgment) in the first-instance jurisdiction should do.

The law provides the option to file an appeal against the first-instance court’s decision that led to their defeat. This position is advantageous for the party since they are allowed to present any arguments they wish in the Court of Appeal without any restriction. This is because the party did not have the opportunity to be “heard” in the first-instance court due to their absence.

If the party’s appeal is accepted, the court will annul the first-instance decision and definitively decide on their case. However, in this scenario, the party will have “lost” one level of jurisdiction. For this reason, the law offers an additional option: the party can simultaneously file a “motion to set aside a default judgment.” If the court accepts this motion, the case will return to the first-instance court, giving the party the chance to present their arguments at both levels of jurisdiction.

9.What happens if there were multiple parties in the first-instance trial?

In cases involving inheritances, it is common for there to be multiple parties, either on the side of the plaintiffs or the defendants. These parties do not always have shared interests, so the law needs to find a balance between these opposing interests. Often, not all parties wish to file an appeal against the decision; some may prefer to accept the ruling (and possibly their defeat) from the first level of jurisdiction.

The law stipulates that if multiple parties were defeated by the same judicial decision, even if only one of them files an appeal, the positive effects of that appeal will also apply to the others. In other words, the remaining parties can present their arguments in the Court of Appeal to avoid receiving a final decision without having had a fair chance at both levels of jurisdiction.

However, for this to occur, it is essential that the other parties have not accepted the decision or have not explicitly waived their right to appeal. Acceptance of the decision, as a legal term, means that the losing parties have not complied with the decision’s content if it was enforced against them, or they have explicitly reserved their rights in case they complied with the decision.

10.What are the rules regarding witnesses in the Court of Appeal?

As previously mentioned, the Court of Appeal may exceptionally hear witnesses requested by the parties, even on matters for which they had already testified in the first-instance court. However, witness testimony as a method of evidence is subject to certain limitations. Specifically, the law prohibits the use of witnesses when the matter concerns private or notarized documents or written agreements where the disputed amount exceeds €30,000.

Furthermore, witness testimony is not allowed to contradict the content of a written document. This restriction stems from the prevalence of false testimony in Greek courts, leading the Greek legislator to view witnesses with skepticism as a means of evidence. For this reason, individuals convicted of perjury are examined without taking an oath if their testimony is requested.

An exception to this rule allows witness testimony if the document in question was accidentally lost (and this can be proven), if witness testimony is customary under the circumstances (as in commercial transactions), or if the document cannot be obtained for legal or moral reasons (such as an informal gift between relatives who did not draft a document due to mutual trust).

Next to the client and his needs.

Athina Kontogianni-Lawyer

The above does not constitute legal advice, and no responsibility is assumed for it. For more information, please contact us.