english
български deutsch italiano
Varadinov & Co.
Legal Bulletin

Varadinov & Co Attorneys at law is recognised in the IFLR1000
IFLR2019
IFLR2018
IFLR2017
IFLR2016
IFLR2015
IFLR2014
Varadinov & Co Attorneys at law is listed in Legal 500
Legal500

State Gazette, issue 81 /October 10th, 2017
The Supreme Judicial Council approved a Panel Order regulating the terms and procedure for determining the number of judges, ethical rules of conduct and organizational issues related to their activities under the Basic Code of Criminal Procedure Code.The number of jurors for a district, regional, military and specialized criminal court shall be determined at a general meeting of the judges of their respective higher court not later than 8 months before the expiry of the term of office of the acting jurors. When determining the number of judges, account shall be taken of the number of cases that each court of first instance has dealt with in the previous year with the jury and the opinion of the President of the relevant court on the trend of increasing or decreasing these cases for the entire term of office of the jury.
The municipal councils on the territory of the judicial district of each court, and for the specialized criminal court - the Sofia Municipal Council, draw up a list of approved jury candidates under the terms and conditions stipulated in the Judicial System Act. Within one month of receiving the list under para. 1 the commission under Art. 68e JSA performs the compliance check provided for by the law. The jurors for each regional, district and specialized criminal court shall be elected by the general meeting of the judges from their respective higher court - the district court, the appellate court and the appellate specialized criminal court, from the list of candidates granted to them by the municipal council. The appointment of a jury shall take place no later than one month before the expiry of the term of office of the acting jury.
The mandate of the jury begins to run from the date of the oath. For each case, primary and reserve jurors are appointed on the principle of random selection by electronic distribution. Selection is carried out by an employee (s) of the court, specifically designated by his / her chairman. With the injunction order, the Judge-Rapporteur determines the need for alternate jurors as well as pedagogues, psychologists and social work professionals. The court judge must be given the opportunity to see the case before the hearing. The remuneration is determined on an hourly basis, including an hour of commencement, on the basis of a daily salary of one twenty-second of 60 per cent of the basic salary respectively for district judge, district judge and judge of a military court, but not less than 20 leva per day. The number of hours payable is actually paid and is not limited to an eight-hour working day. The jury shall be reimbursed for the expenses they have incurred in connection with their participation in court hearings, travel from their place of residence or place of employment to the court building and vice versa, within the jurisdiction, by rules adopted to pay travel expenses in the relevant court

State Gazette, issue 85 /October 24th, 2017
Updating the national legislation in line with the development of the European law introduces the new State Aid Act. It lays down the conditions and procedure for the granting of State aid and minimum aid; the implementation of the notification procedures according to Art. 108, para. (3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; State aid categories compatible with the internal market; the performance of reporting, collection, recording and storage obligations; the recovery of unlawful, incompatible and misappropriated state aid, as well as the de minimis aid received; the assessment of State aid, which does not necessarily notify the European Commission, of compliance with the block exemption rules; the legal challenge of State aid violations and minimal aid.
The granting of State aid, except in the cases provided for in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, is incompatible with the internal market. The granting of State aid is compatible with the internal market where the aid is of a social nature and is granted to individual consumers without discrimination as to the origin of the goods concerned or is intended to remedy the damage caused by natural disasters or other exceptional occurrences. The granting of State aid may be considered compatible with the internal market where it meets one of the following conditions: 1. encourages the economic development of low-living or high-unemployment areas; 2. Assist the implementation of a project with significant economic interest for the European Union or to overcome major difficulties in the economy of the Republic of Bulgaria; 3. assist the development of certain economic activities or individual economic areas if it does not affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest of the European Union; 4. promote the promotion of culture and the preservation of cultural and historical heritage if it does not affect trading conditions and competition in the European Union to an extent contrary to the common interest of the European Union; 5. authorized by an act of the Council of the European Union on a proposal from the European Commission.
The Minister of Finance is the national authority responsible for the monitoring, transparency and coordination of State aid and minimum aid at national, regional and municipal level and with the European Commission. State aid or de minimis aid shall be granted by a grant act designating the aid adminis- trator. The Aid Administrator is responsible for the lawful provision and spending of State aid and minimal aid in accordance with European Union law and Bulgarian law. The aid adminis- trator is required to provide each recipient of State aid or a minimal assistance with information on the type, size, justification and compatibility of the aid by reference to the European Union act, its name and publication in the Official Journal of the European Union , as well as the aid payable by the aid recipient as a result of the aid. The information must be included in the act granting the aid or made available to the aid recipient within 14 days of the issuance of the act. Information on the amount of aid is not provided when the aid relates to tax measures that require taxpayers to process tax returns.
The recipient of aid is any undertaking to which State aid or minimum aid is intended, and any undertaking which benefits directly or indirectly from that aid, receiving any form of economic advantage and in respect of which all the elements for availability of aid within the meaning of Art. 107 (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. An enterprise is any person who carries out an economic activity irrespective of its legal form, status and mode of financing, regardless of whether it generates and distributes profits. The recovery of unlawful and incompatible state aid or incorrectly used State aid is based on a decision of the European Commission with an order for recovery and an enforceable act establishing a public claim, where applicable. The decision of the European Commission to recover unlawful and incompatible state aid or incorrectly used state aid is enforceable under the procedure of the Tax and Social Insurance Procedure Code. Judicial litigation under the Administrative Procedures Code and a number of special rules are subject to State aid or de minimis aid and actions for breaches of Bulgarian law and European Union law in granting State aid or minimum aid, claims relating to the granting of State aid or minimum aid.

State Gazette, issue 86 /October 27th, 2017
The most serious package of amendments to the Civil Procedure Code since its entry into force in 2008 approved the National Assembly. The inability of the respondent to find the address mentioned above will now be at least three visits to the address, with an interval of at least one week between each of them, at least one of which must be on a non-working day. This rule does not apply when the service provider has gathered data that the respondent does not live at the address, by reference to the condominium manager, the mayor of the respective settlement or otherwise, and has certified this by indicating the source of that data in the message . The court will examine of its own motion both the address and the place of work of the defendant and will order service at the place of employment, respectively the place of employment or the place of business. The remuneration of the special representative shall be determined by the court according to the factual and legal complexity of the case, the amount of the remuneration may also be below the minimum for the type of work under Art. 36, para. 2 of the Attorney Act, but not less than one-second of it. The time limits shall cease to run for the parties during the days declared as official holidays under Art. 154, para. 1 of the Labor Code, as well as during the judicial vacation under Art. 329, para. 1 of the Law on the Judiciary, with the exception of the terms of the cases under Art. 329, para. 3 of the Judicial System Act.
Where the subject matter of the case is a right of ownership or other real rights over property, as well as claims for the existence, destruction or termination of a contract with a subject of real property rights and for the conclusion of a final agreement with such object, the amount of the state fee shall be on a quarter of the price of the claim. For the one-off claims filed in defense of one interest, one state fee on the protected interest is collected irrespective of the number of defendants. For the claims filed in defense of various interests, the minimum fee is collected from all interests. The proportion of the proportionate fee in enforcement cases decreases as the interest increases and the fee can not exceed the maximum amount set in the tariff. Proportional inventory fee is charged on the lower amount of the price of the item described and the cash receipts. A proportional inventory fee shall be deducted from the charge for execution of a receivable, which may not exceed by more than one second the amount of the inventory fee determined at the moment the inventory is executed. The sum of all proportional fees at the expense of the debtor or the creditor in one enforcement procedure may not exceed one tenth of the obligation except where their minimum amount specified in the tariff exceeds that amount. For an obligation in excess of forty-five minimum wages this sum may not exceed one-fifteen of the obligation but not less than three minimum wages.
A scale for all execution fees is introduced at the expense of the debtor in an enforcement procedure, which may not exceed a certain percentage of the minimum wage. The total fees for execution are not inclusive fees for administering complaints against bailiffs’ actions, as well as for notifying and joining the joining creditors. Where the total amount of the fees is reached and the creditor requests new enforcement actions, the fees are for his account and are not due by the debtor. There are also a number of changes to the mechanisms of the warrant and enforcement proceedings, including during the period of voluntary performance, to protect the debtor. Electronic public auctions are regulated through a single on-line platform created and maintained by the Ministry of Justice.
The scope of the optional cassation appeal is significantly expanded. Appeals before the Supreme Court of Cassation shall be subject to an appeal before the Court of First Instance has ruled on a substantive or procedural issue which is: 1. resolved in contradiction with the mandatory practice of the Supreme Court of Cassation and the Supreme Court in interpretative rulings and rulings; contrary to the practice of the Supreme Court of Cassation; 2. resolved in contradiction with acts of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Bulgaria or of the Court of Justice of the European Union; 3. Relevant to the correct application of the law and to the development of the law. Notwithstanding these prerequisites, the appeals decision is admissible for a cassation appeal in the case of probable nullity or inadmissibility, and in the case of obvious irregularity. The decisions under Art. 290, para. 2 will not be considered as mandatory case law.