Background
For many years, Cyprus operated under the old Civil Procedure Rules, dating back several decades. While these rules provided a framework for litigation, they often fostered a culture of excessive formalism. Even minor procedural defects could prove fatal to a case, resulting in claims being struck out or dismissed without judicial consideration of the merits. In practice, litigants sometimes saw their rights curtailed on purely technical grounds, undermining access to justice.
The 2023 Reform
This position changed fundamentally with the entry into force of the New Civil Procedure Rules (“NCPR”) in September 2023. The reform, inspired by modern procedural standards across Europe, introduced a new philosophy: disputes should be resolved on their substance rather than on technicalities.
At the heart of the NCPR lies the Overriding Objective (Part 1), which requires the courts to deal with cases justly, proportionately, and efficiently, with an emphasis on saving time and costs.
Equally significant is Part 3.8, which provides that:
- a procedural error does not automatically invalidate a step in proceedings, unless the court so orders;
- such an error can be remedied by way of an appropriate court order; and
- annulment will be ordered only where the error is serious, and annulment is necessary in the interests of justice.
Jurisprudence under the New Rules
The recent jurisprudence of the Cyprus Court of Appeal demonstrates a decisive move towards this substantive approach.
- Zurab Jincharadze v. CBR Capital Ltd (No. 39/2019, 12.9.2024)
The Court underlined that even where an amendment application is filed carelessly or out of time, the key question is whether granting relief serves the interests of justice.
- Robert Mucinic v. Sky CAC Ltd (No. 1/2019, 7.6.2024)
Here, an application was filed in the correct form, but the section for the relief sought was left blank. The Court held that, although the pleading was defective, neither the substance nor the rights of third parties were prejudiced. Relying on the Overriding Objective and Part 3.8, the procedure was preserved.
- Miltiades Neophytou Civil Engineering Contractors & Developers Ltd v. Municipality of Paphos (No. 5/2018, 16.1.2024)
An application filed in the wrong form was nonetheless accepted, as it contained all the necessary particulars and did not affect the rights of any third party.
- Civil Application No. 112/2023, 22.9.2023
The Court held that although the prescribed form was not used, the application contained all the essential particulars for its promotion. As no rights of third parties were affected, the procedure was preserved in line with Part 3.8.
These decisions confirm that Cypriot Courts are embracing the spirit of the new rules: the emphasis lies firmly on substantive justice, not procedural blocks.
Alignment with European Standards
The reform brings Cyprus into closer alignment with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, which stress the fundamental right of access to a court. By limiting the scope for purely technical dismissals, the New Civil Procedure Rules ensure that litigants have a fair opportunity to have their disputes determined on the merits.
This approach also mirrors developments in other common law jurisdictions, notably the Civil Procedure Rules of England and Wales, which similarly introduced the concept of an overriding objective in 1999.
Practical Implications
For practitioners and litigants alike, the implications are significant:
- Greater flexibility: procedural mistakes no longer necessarily result in fatal consequences.
- Focus on substance: arguments must address the merits of the case rather than relying on technical objections.
- Judicial discretion: courts now have broader powers to remedy defects, ensuring proportionality and fairness.
- Efficiency and costs: the emphasis on streamlined, proportionate procedures support quicker, less costly litigation.
Conclusion
The New Civil Procedure Rules represent a decisive cultural shift in Cypriot litigation. By prioritising substance over form and equipping courts with tools to cure procedural irregularities, they modernise the system and enhance public confidence in the administration of justice. Most importantly, they safeguard the principle that disputes should be determined on their merits, a principle at the heart of every fair justice system.
For inquiries or legal assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us at info@kpklegal.com.
Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are advised to consult with legal professionals for advice specific to their individual circumstances.