Recent changes in the Civil Procedure Code concerning order and enforcement proceedings 

Injunction proceedings are among the most common civil proceedings heard by district courts. This conclusion can be supported by statistics from the Supreme Judicial Council, according to which in 2023 cases under Articles 410 and 417 of the Civil Procedure Code accounted for over 54% of the total number of cases, and in 2024 this percentage rose to almost 60%.

In addition to the large number of cases, until recently, applications for enforcement orders were examined by the courts at the debtor's registered office or permanent address. This created an uneven workload for courts in different judicial districts across the country.

The above factors prompted the adoption of amendments to the Civil Procedure Code in Chapter Thirty-Six, "Issuance of a Writ of Execution," and Chapter Thirty-Seven, "Order Proceedings." They were adopted in early 2023, with their entry into force postponed until July 1, 2025. This article examines some of these changes and their impact on order and enforcement proceedings.

Digitization is particularly suitable for summary proceedings, as the latter are formal in nature and entirely document-based. Therefore, the use of information technology facilitates both the court and citizens. The newly created Article 409a of the Civil Procedure Code provides that all actions in summary proceedings shall be carried out electronically, but the applicant and the debtor are still allowed to submit documents on paper, unless Chapter Thirty-Seven of the Civil Procedure Code provides otherwise.

Article 410, paragraph 5 of the Civil Procedure Code has also been amended, and now stipulates that traders, the state and state institutions, municipalities, notaries, and private bailiffs are required to submit applications electronically only. Persons represented by a lawyer are also required to submit applications only electronically, but this amendment to Article 410, paragraph 5 of the Civil Procedure Code will enter into force on 10 September 2025 (Section 19 of the Civil Procedure Code Amendment Act, State Gazette No. 55, 08.07.2025).

Electronic filing of applications is carried out entirely through the Unified Portal for Electronic Justice (EPEJ) using a specialised electronic form. The new templates for enforcement orders and other documents in enforcement proceedings have been approved by Regulation No. H-2 of 18 February 2020, issued by the Minister of Justice, and are available on the EPEP. It is important to choose the correct application under Article 410 or Article 417 of the Civil Procedure Code. An incorrect choice will lead to the judge ruling that the application has been filed incorrectly, which will delay or impede the process.

All relevant contracts, invoices, correspondence, etc. are attached in digital form. The system automatically checks whether the data in the application has been filled in correctly and whether the necessary documents have been attached from a formal point of view.

Furthermore, Article 31(4) of Regulation No. 5 of 1 June 2017 on the organization and procedure for maintaining, storing, and accessing electronic files and the manner of storing evidence and means of evidence in cases, as well as the internal circulation and storage of other information processed by the court administration, it is provided that an electronic file is created automatically and it is possible to obtain automatic access to it without the need to submit a separate application, as was the case until now.

Pursuant to Article 410, paragraph 4 of the Civil Procedure Code, when the application is submitted electronically, all subsequent procedural actions of the applicant shall be performed only in electronic form, with the exception of actions for appealing acts under Chapter Thirty-Seven of the Civil Procedure Code and in proceedings relating to a claim for the existence of a claim, an objection before the appellate court, and a claim for contesting the claim.

Another significant change resulting from digitization is that the general criterion for determining local jurisdiction, which is applicable to all civil cases for which no other territorial connection is specified, is excluded. This criterion is the permanent address or registered office of the defendant (Articles 105 and 108 of the Civil Procedure Code).

When initiating enforcement proceedings, the bailiff shall immediately record this in the relevant electronic file through the EPEP. Until the entry is deleted or it is indicated that the enforcement case has been completed or terminated, no subsequent enforcement case based on the same enforcement order may be initiated.

This change also aims to correct the imbalance in the distribution of cases in order to achieve an equal workload of summary proceedings for all judges in Bulgaria.

Digitization also extends to enforcement proceedings. Immediately after the order is issued, the system generates an electronic enforcement order, so this process does not require any additional action on the part of the judge or the applicant.

Another aspect of the changes is that automatic access to the case file can be obtained without the need to submit a separate application for electronic access, as was previously the case. The electronic enforcement order allows bailiffs to proceed with enforcement actions, as they receive access to the unique code of the enforcement order through the EPEP without having to wait for the issuance of a paper document in accordance with Article 360(c)(2)(5) of the Judicial System Act.

When initiating enforcement proceedings, the bailiff shall immediately record this in the relevant electronic file through the EPEP. Until the entry is deleted or it is indicated that the enforcement case has been completed or terminated, no subsequent enforcement case based on the same enforcement order may be initiated.

Although they aim to facilitate access to court and enable faster consideration of summary proceedings and commencement of enforcement, the changes discussed pose challenges in relation to working in the fully electronic environment of the EEP. In this sense, they may create difficulties for citizens and legal entities in protecting their rights. Therefore, we recommend that in cases that can be resolved in this manner, the services of a lawyer should also be used.

KGK Law Firm has many years of experience in debt collection, specifically through order and enforcement proceedings. Our lawyers monitor reforms related to the digitization of civil proceedings and can assist in the preparation of applications and the subsequent development of proceedings. For more information, please contact us.