European Judicial Training Network Exchange Programme for Judicial Authorities REPORT ON THE EXCHANGE AND SUMMARY Instructions: 1. The report must be sent to the EJTN ([email protected]) within one month after the exchange. 2. Please use the template below to write your report (recommended length: 4 pages). 3. Please write in English or French. Should this not be possible, the report can be written in another language but the summary must be in English or French. 4. Please read the guidelines for drafting the report (in Annex). Feel free to add any other relevant information in your report. 5. The summary shall contain a synthesis of the most important information of the report. 6. Please note that NO NAMES, neither yours nor the ones of the persons you met during your exchange, should appear in the report in order to ensure anonymity1. Initials can be used when necessary. Identification of the participant Name: First name: Nationality: AUSTRIA Country of exchange: DENMARK Publication For dissemination purposes and as information for future participants in the Programme please take note that, unless you indicate otherwise, EJTN may publish your report in its website. In this case the report will remain anonymous and your name and surname will not appear. To this aim, please do not mention any names in the reports. Initials can be used instead. Please tick this box if you do not wish for your report to be published For completion by EJTN staff only Publication reference: 1 To that purpose, the first page of this report will be taken out before any possible publication Réseau Européen de Formation Judiciaire/European Judicial Training Network (aisbl) Rue du Luxembourg 16B, B-1000 Bruxelles; Tel: +32 2 280 22 42; Fax: + 32 2 280 22 36; E-mail: [email protected] With the support of the European Union For completion by EJTN staff only Publication reference: Identification of the participant Nationality: AUSTRIA Functions: JUDGE Length of service: 4 years Identification of the exchange Hosting jurisdiction/institution: Glostrup district court City: GLOSTRUP Country: DENMARK Dates of the exchange: 21/10/2013 - 1/11/2013 Type of exchange: one to one exchange group exchange general exchange specialized exchange (please specify : ) REPORT 1. Programme of the exchange: The programme started on Monday, 21st of October at 10.00 a.m. at the Glostrup district court. A group of 6 judges from the Netherlands, Italy, Romania, Poland and Austria was warmly welcomed by the president of the district court, L.L., the head of the secretariat M.A. and deputy judge D.A. We were given a presentation of the programme for the next two weeks. The programme consisted of different types of activities. Whereas on the one hand side we were shown different hearings in civil, criminal, bailiff and probate cases, we visited on the other hand side various institutions in the Copenhagen area, such as the Danish Court Administration Office, the High Court of Eastern Denmark, the General Prosecutor's Office, the Danish Parliament and the Supreme Court. We also visited a very special and unique institution, namely the Appeals Permission Board. The visit at the above - mentioned institution always included a guided tour and a presentation of the tasks of the institution by internals and closed with a general discussion and comparison between the different member states' system. At the Danish Parliament (Folketinget) there was the possibility of a European Judicial Training Network With the support of the European Union Exchange Programme for Judicial Authorities discussion with two members of parliament about the legal affairs committee and the present situation in Denmark and present developments (e.g. gang - crime related laws). II. The hosting institution: We were glad to be hosted by a very well organised team from the district court of Glostrup. The district court of Glostrup has jurisdiction over approximately 396.000 inhabitants within the dense inhabited greater Copenhagen area with about 690 inh./km². At the Glostrup district court there are about 38 judges. 19 judges out of this number are appointed judges and the rest of them are so - called "deputy judges". Deputy judges are judges, that are hired by the presidents of the district courts. Their salary is lower than those of the appointed judges but they work under the same constitutional protection of judges as well. Although there is no regulation about that, it is usual, that you can only became an appointed judge, when you have fulfilled a nine - months training and evaluation at the High Court, passed a hearing at the Judicial Appointments Council and when you are no younger than 40 years old. Therefore the established posts for appointed judges are stated by law and can not be transferred or changed by the administration of the courts. The Glostrup district court annualy deals with about 13.600 criminal cases, 4.400,-- civil cases, 29.000 bailiff cases an 3.700 probate court cases on average. The Glostrup district court is one of the 24 district courts of Denmark. The district courts are the courts of first instance. Every case starts at this level, even big criminal cases with a jury. In the court system there are two High Courts that build the Courts of second instance, namely the Eastern High Court and the Western High Court. At the top of the court system there is the Danish Supreme Court. There are also two specialised courts: the Maritime and Commercial Court and the Land Registration Court. Besides the courts there are also other institutions that secure a balanced and well functioning court system: - the Appeals Permission Board - the Judicial Appointments Council - the External Review Board - the Danisch Court Administration Denmark itself has about 5,8 mill. inhabitants. There are about 360 appointed judges. Besides the appointed judges there are numerous deputy judges, approximately 500 - 600. This number varies throughout a year. The wages of the judges are when compared with the average earnings, quite high. The public has a very high trust in the court system. This is a result of a very transparent public adminstration and a very transparent court system. The media have special rights to receive judgements and informations about proceedings. In every court rooum there are special places for the media. It is indeed usual, that a judge both deals with civil and criminal cases. Some judges deal with family cases, bailiff cases or probate cases too. Usually an average week of a judge consists of two days of hearings in civil cases and two days of hearings in criminal cases. One day per week the judges have a day off to work out the written decisions and prepare for the hearings. It is very common that judges have side - jobs as well. As there are no administrative courts, there are several special boards, where a judge has to be the chairman. The board that controls this activities is the External Review Board. The Glostrup district court depends on the budget of the Danish Court Administration Office, that is fully independent from the ministry of Justice. The Danish Court Administration Office and the General Prosecutors' Office put very much effort in getting the best graduates from university in order to have the best legal trained persons as judges. With good marks at university and good personal requirements it is European Judicial Training Network With the support of the European Union Exchange Programme for Judicial Authorities quite simple to become a deputy very quickly. Then there continues a stage of a training period of about three years, that closes with a test. The better the evalution of the test (that you can't fail) the more likely you once will become an appointed judge. III. The law of the host country: Denmark already shows some influence of case - law systems. It is not very common like in central European countries, that in the regulations every detail is stipulated precisely. Therefore it is without any doubt very necessery to know similar rulings in a specific area of law. What struck me most was the length of civil proceedings that are indeed kept very short. Since summer 2013 there is the possibility to summon parties by phone calls to court. I was also particularly interested in the possibility to hold hearings via telephone - conferences, e.g. the first hearings in civil cases. This is a very fast an speedy way of starting a case. One more fact of the law of the host country that interested me was the law about the court structure. In 2007 the court systems was restructured. The number of courts very cut and there was put an empasis on more efficiency. One part of this was the centralised Land Registration Court that was put on the country side to put a balance of job offers between the city area of Copenhagen and the countryside. This Court works very fast an deals with registration of real estate and cars. Applications for registration can be sent electronically and very easily, there are hardly any formal criterias. The applications are treated within some days. IV: The comparative law aspect in your exchange: In my opinion there were a lot of interesting inputs I could experience in Denmark. The main difference between Austria and Denmark was, in my point of view, the role a judge plays in a court room. While a judge in Austria leads a process, asks questions and shows a very active role in the hearings, a judge in Denmark really "hears" a case and takes over a more passive role. This is in fact a very good understanding in favour of being unbiased and not to help one party through asking the right questions.