Under the amended provisions, courts are expressly empowered to impose a monetary fine on a party whose statement or submission is intended solely to delay the proceedings. In such cases, the disregarded submission will not be served on the opposing party. The amendment introduces a statutory definition of dilatory submissions, identifying them as filings that bear no substantive connection to the subject matter of the dispute, are unjustifiably lengthy or repetitive, or fail to address the procedural act or court order that prompted the submission. Such practices have placed an unjustified burden on the courts and increased the length of proceedings, so the legislator’s clear objective was to establish a more disciplined procedural framework. The legislature preserved an important procedural safeguard by excluding the application of this sanction against parties acting without legal representation.
Another significant change concerns the use of judgments containing abbreviated reasoning. The amendment allows for the application of judgments containing abbreviated reasoning, already used in civil proceedings, in first-instance judgments that are not subject to appeal, provided that they were not delivered in proceedings conducted without a hearing. The legislator’s apparent intention is to align the extent of the duty to reasoning with the available legal remedies and to reduce the length of administrative proceedings as well.
With regard to modifications to the statement of claim, the general rule remains unchanged, i.e. the claimant may change the claim no later than the first hearing. However, under the new regulation, modifications are admissible after the first hearing, but only under strict conditions. Modifications may be allowed, for example, on the basis of new facts that became known to the party after the commencement of proceedings through no fault of its own, where the modification is directly causally linked to newly asserted facts, or where it is justified by the court’s substantive case management.
Finally, the amendment clarifies the powers of the Curia in review proceedings. In addition to setting aside a final judicial decision, the Curia may now render a new decision on the merits where the facts necessary for the decision can be established. This clarification is aimed at avoiding repeated remittals and ensuring that cases can be brought to a definitive conclusion without unnecessary procedural cycles.
Overall, the amendments entered into force on 31 December 2025 serve the objective of ensuring a faster, more focused, and more disciplined conduct of administrative litigation.