Litigation in Montenegro

1. General Trends

1.1. What is the current state of litigation in your jurisdiction, and what recent trends or developments have been observed?

In Montenegro, litigation remains a protracted and complex process, largely due to systemic inefficiencies, frequent procedural adjournments, and a persistent backlog of cases. Civil and commercial disputes routinely extend over several years before reaching final resolution (including legal remedies), with enforcement proceedings further compounding delays. Courts continue to adhere to a highly formalistic approach, often prioritizing procedural correctness over substantive efficiency, which limits the effectiveness of available summaries or expedited procedures.

Despite ongoing discussions on judicial reform, tangible improvements remain limited – digitalization efforts have stalled, and case management continues to rely heavily on paper-based processes. Given these realities, there is a noticeable shift toward arbitration and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, especially in high-value contracts where parties seek to avoid the uncertainty and protracted timelines of the court system.

1.2. What are the key legal frameworks that regulate litigation?

Montenegro’s litigation framework is rooted in civil law traditions, primarily governed by the Law on Courts, the Civil Procedure Law, and the Law on Enforcement and Security. These laws regulate court jurisdiction, procedural rules, and enforcement mechanisms, forming the foundation of the judicial process.

2. Jurisdiction and Competence

2.1. How is the court system structured in your jurisdiction?

The judicial system of Montenegro is structured into a hierarchical framework comprising multiple tiers of courts, ensuring legal oversight. It consists of Basic Courts, High Courts, the Appellate Court, and the Supreme Court, which function as the core judicial bodies. Additionally, specialized courts, including the Commercial Court, Administrative Court, and Misdemeanour Courts, are each tasked with handling specific types of legal disputes.

The Basic Courts serve as first-instance courts for criminal, civil, labor, enforcement, and international legal matters unless another court has jurisdiction by law. In criminal cases, they handle offenses punishable by fines or imprisonment of up to 10 years, as well as cases explicitly assigned to them, including post-conviction matters such as expungement of records and termination of security measures. In civil disputes, they adjudicate property, marital, family, and personal rights cases, along with media-related disputes concerning corrections and personal rights violations. They also oversee labor and employment disputes, including collective agreements, employer-union conflicts, and strike regulations. Additionally, Basic Courts handle non-contentious legal matters, enforcement and security cases, and the recognition and enforcement of foreign court decisions, except those under the jurisdiction of the Commercial Court. They provide legal aid, manage international legal assistance, including document service, and confirm settlements reached through mediation. Beyond these functions, they perform other duties prescribed by law and handle any first-instance cases not assigned to another court. There are 15 Basic Courts spread across various municipalities in Montenegro.

The High Courts have jurisdiction as a first-instance court for serious criminal offenses where the prescribed sentence exceeds ten years of imprisonment, regardless of the circumstances under which the crime was committed. It specifically handles cases of manslaughter, rape, abuse of economic position, endangering air traffic safety, drug trafficking, inciting violent constitutional changes, disclosure of classified information, inciting national, racial, or religious hatred, violating territorial sovereignty, unconstitutional activities, and crimes against humanity and international law. It also tries cases designated to it by special laws. A special department within the High Court in Podgorica is established to handle serious crimes involving organized crime, corruption (when committed by high-ranking public officials), money laundering, terrorism, and war crimes.

As a second-instance court, it reviews appeals against decisions made by Basic Courts. Additionally, it determines extradition requests, recognizes and enforces foreign court decisions in criminal cases, resolves jurisdictional disputes between Basic Courts, and decides on requests for expungement of convictions and termination of security measures or legal consequences of a conviction. It also provides international legal assistance in criminal matters, including interrogations, special evidentiary procedures, and other cross-border legal cooperation. The High Court also performs other duties prescribed by law.

There are two High Courts in Montenegro, each covering specific territorial jurisdictions.

The Appellate Court of Montenegro, based in Podgorica, has jurisdiction over the entire country. It reviews appeals against first-instance decisions of the High Courts and decisions of the Commercial Court. Additionally, it resolves jurisdictional disputes between Basic Courts under different High Courts, between Basic and High Courts, and between High Courts. The Appellate Court also performs other duties as prescribed by law.

The Supreme Court of Montenegro, based in Podgorica, is the highest judicial authority in the country. It has jurisdiction to rule as a third-instance court when prescribed by law, decide on extraordinary legal remedies against court decisions, and review legal remedies against decisions of its own panels when permitted by law. Additionally, it transfers territorial jurisdiction when another competent court can conduct proceedings more efficiently or for other important reasons, and it determines the territorially competent court when jurisdiction cannot be clearly established based on legal provisions. It also resolves jurisdictional disputes between different types of courts within Montenegro, except when another court has the authority to do so. The Supreme Court also performs other duties as prescribed by law.

2.2. Are there specialized courts for specific types of litigation?

Only the Commercial Court handles litigation, while other specialized courts, such as the Administrative Court, Misdemeanour Courts, and the Constitutional Court, are designated for specific types of legal matters outside litigation.

The Commercial Court of Montenegro, headquartered in Podgorica, serves as the first-instance court for disputes involving business entities, entrepreneurs, and other legal persons engaged in commercial activities. Its jurisdiction covers corporate law matters, registration of business entities, bankruptcy and liquidation proceedings, intellectual property disputes (including copyrights, industrial property rights, and trademarks), competition law violations, and market monopolization issues. Additionally, it adjudicates disputes concerning maritime and aviation law (excluding passenger transport), possession disturbances between commercial entities, and enforcement of arbitration awards when prescribed by law. The Commercial Court also conducts bankruptcy and liquidation proceedings, enforces judgments related to commercial disputes, recognizes and enforces foreign court and arbitration decisions, and validates settlements reached through mediation in commercial disputes. Furthermore, it provides international legal assistance in commercial matters and performs other duties as prescribed by law.

The Administrative Court of Montenegro, based in Podgorica, has jurisdiction over the entire country. It adjudicates administrative disputes, ensuring the legality of administrative acts and decisions made by public authorities. Additionally, it performs other duties prescribed by law, serving as a key institution in overseeing government actions and protecting citizens’ rights in administrative matters.

Misdemeanour Courts handle minor offenses and administrative violations. There are three first-instance Misdemeanour Courts, each covering specific municipalities and operating local branches. These courts have jurisdiction over requests to initiate misdemeanor proceedings and judicial reviews of administrative fines and perform other legally mandated duties. The Higher Misdemeanour Court, based in Podgorica, serves as the second-instance court, reviewing appeals against Misdemeanour Court decisions, resolving jurisdictional disputes between Misdemeanour Courts, and handling other legal matters as prescribed by law.

2.3. How is jurisdiction determined in cross-border litigation, especially in cases involving foreign parties or multiple jurisdictions?

Jurisdiction in cross-border litigation is primarily governed by the Private International Law and Civil Procedure Law, which establish the general framework. Key factors in determining jurisdiction include the defendant’s domicile or registered seat, the place of contract performance, the location of the harmful event, the presence of a choice of forum clause, exclusive jurisdiction provisions, and voluntary submission to jurisdiction.

3. Initiating Litigation

3.1. What are the primary steps required to initiate litigation in your jurisdiction?

To initiate litigation in Montenegro, the claimant must file a written lawsuit with the competent court. The lawsuit must include identification of the parties (claimant and defendant), a statement of claim outlining the legal and factual grounds, the requested relief or remedy, supporting evidence and documents, and proof of court fee payment unless the claimant is exempt by law. The lawsuit must comply with the formal and procedural requirements set by the Law on Civil Procedure to be considered valid by the court.

In contractual and commercial disputes, the claimant may be required to send a formal demand letter or pre-litigation notice to the opposing party, giving them an opportunity to resolve the issue before initiating court proceedings.

In certain cases, such as small claims disputes, family law matters (parental rights and division of joint property), and insurance claims, the claimant must first attempt mediation through the Mediation Centre and attend an initial session before proceeding to court.

3.2. Are there any specific requirements for parties regarding pre-litigation procedures?

A party intending to initiate court proceedings is required to first approach the Mediation Centre to attempt dispute resolution through mediation in the following cases: small claims disputes as defined by the law on civil procedure claims for compensation of damages under an insurance contract if one of the parties is an insurance company and disputes where mandatory mediation is prescribed by a special law, such as, for instance, labor disputes, disputes between spouses regarding parental rights and division of joint property.

Additionally, during the preliminary hearing – or at the first hearing for the main trial if no preliminary hearing is held – the court is obligated to issue a special ruling mandating an initial mediation session in certain cases before proceeding with litigation. This requirement applies when one of the parties is the State of Montenegro, the Capital City, the Old Royal Capital, or a municipality; the dispute is commercial in nature, excluding cases with international elements, corporate law matters, or disputes involving a party in bankruptcy proceedings; and other disputes expressly designated for mediation under special laws.

4. Timelines

4.1. What are the typical timelines for different stages of litigation, from initiation to resolution?

The Montenegrin judicial system suffers from significant inefficiencies, including a growing case backlog, prolonged resolution times, and a shortage of judicial staff. According to the European Commission’s Montenegro 2024 Report, cases pending for more than three years increased by 20% by the end of 2023, while the average resolution time rose from 238 days in 2022 to 309 days in 2023. Administrative Court cases saw extreme delays, averaging 1,411 days. Despite ongoing recruitment efforts, judicial vacancies persist, further straining the system.

These challenges are compounded by inadequate court infrastructure, limited human resources, and slow adoption of digital tools. While reforms, including improvements to the Judicial Informative System (PRIS), signal progress, the judiciary’s reliance on traditional case management continues to hinder efficiency. Business-related litigation remains particularly slow and bureaucratic.

To improve judicial efficiency, Montenegro must accelerate backlog reduction, enhance clearance rates, and fully implement digital transformation initiatives.

4.2. Are there specific time limits for filing claims, and do these vary depending on the type of dispute?

The time limit for filing claims depends on the type of dispute. While the Law on Obligations sets general limitation periods, specific laws may prescribe different deadlines based on the nature of the claim.

General claims expire after 10 years unless a different period is prescribed by law. Periodic claims, such as rent, interest payments, and alimony, must be filed within 3 years from the due date of each individual payment, while contractual claims expire 5 years from the first missed payment. Commercial claims between businesses expire after 3 years, calculated separately for each transaction or service. Claims for damages must be filed within 3 years from when the injured party became aware of the damage and the responsible party, and no later than five years from its occurrence, while damages caused by criminal offenses expire with the statute of limitations for criminal prosecution. Claims for damages due to corruption expire after five years from awareness and no later than 15 years from the act. Utility bills and subscription fees expire after two years, while court-affirmed claims recognized by final judgments, administrative rulings, or settlements expire after 10 years, even if the original period was shorter. Insurance claims have varying time limits: five years for life insurance and three years for other types, starting from the calendar year in which the claim arose. Additionally, monetary claims arising from employment, including unpaid wages and bonuses, must be filed within four years from the date the obligation was incurred, or they may be dismissed as time-barred unless an exception applies under the law.

5. Interim Measures

5.1. What interim remedies are available in your jurisdiction?

Montenegrin law provides a robust framework for interim remedies, ensuring that the enforcement of claims remains effective while preventing irreparable harm. These measures, governed primarily by the Law on Enforcement and Security and the Civil Procedure Code, allow courts and, in certain cases, public bailiffs to grant and execute interim measures to secure monetary and non-monetary claims. Interim measures may be granted at any stage of the proceedings, including before initiating a lawsuit, during litigation, or even after the judgment, if necessary for enforcement purposes.

The types of interim remedies include, but are not limited to:

i. Precautionary Measures – granted when the claim is based on a court ruling that is not yet final or enforceable, provided that there is a risk that enforcement may be hindered or prevented. These may include inventory and seizure of movable property to prevent its disposal; prohibition on debtors making payments or delivering goods to the opposing party; restriction on bank transactions, preventing the debtor’s bank or a third party from transferring funds from the debtor’s account; pre-registration of a pledge on immovable property belonging to the debtor; seizure of shares or equity interests in a business entity.

ii. Provisional Measures – applied to both monetary and non-monetary claims and imposed when a party demonstrates a need to prevent imminent harm, preserve evidence, or safeguard a right pending a final decision. These may include but are not limited to: prohibiting the debtor from disposing of movable property, with or without safekeeping provisions; restricting the transfer or encumbrance of shares or equity interests, with mandatory registration in public records; prohibiting the sale or encumbrance of immovable property or property rights, with registration in the land registry; preventing third-party debtors from paying obligations to the debtor or restricting the debtor from receiving and disposing of such claims; freezing funds in the debtor’s bank account, prohibiting payments to third parties or withdrawals. A party may request the court to impose any appropriate provisional measure, as the legal system does not follow a closed list (numerus clausus) of measures.

iii. Security Interests – creditors may secure their claims by registering a pledge on immovable or movable assets based on an enforceable title or a contractual agreement between the parties.

iv. Preservation of Evidence – In situations where there is a risk that evidence may be lost, altered, or rendered difficult to present at a later stage, courts have the authority to order the preservation and collection of critical evidence, during and even before the commencement of the main hearing.

v. Other measures – as may be envisaged by special laws.

5.2. Under what circumstances can a party obtain an interim injunction, and how quickly can such relief be granted?

A party may obtain an interim injunction when it is necessary to prevent irreparable harm, secure a claim, or ensure the effectiveness of future enforcement. Interim injunctions are granted by the court or public bailiff upon a party’s request if the applicant demonstrates legal interest, a credible/probable legal claim, and a risk of irreparable harm or obstruction of justice. The principle of proportionality is applicable meaning that the measure must be necessary and proportionate to the risk involved. The applicant may be required to provide security (guarantee) to compensate for any damages if the interim injunction is later found to be unjustified.

6. Discovery

6.1. What are the rules governing the discovery process in your jurisdiction?

The discovery process follows key principles that ensure a fair and structured approach to evidence presentation and evaluation. It is adversarial in nature, requiring parties to present all relevant facts supporting their claims and propose evidence, while general or judicially known facts do not need proof. The party asserting a right bears the burden of proving the facts that support their claim. Conversely, the opposing party must present evidence to prove any facts that would prevent the claim from being established or enforced. Judicial discretion plays a crucial role in evidence evaluation, allowing the court to determine which facts are considered proven based on a thorough assessment of individual and collective evidence. If certain facts are difficult to clarify in proportion to the claim’s importance, the court may rely on discretionary evaluation.

Evidence is primarily presented at the main hearing, but the court may delegate its collection to another court, with the results being reviewed during proceedings. If gathering evidence in a reasonable time is impractical, particularly in cross-border cases, the court sets a deadline and continues proceedings even if some evidence remains unavailable. Additionally, the court has the authority to establish facts not presented by the parties and introduce new evidence if it identifies an attempt to manipulate legal claims. However, the court cannot base its decision on undisclosed facts or evidence without granting the parties an opportunity to respond.

6.2. What types of evidence can be requested, and how are discovery disputes resolved?

During court proceedings, various types of evidence can be requested to establish facts and clarify legal disputes.

Inspection is conducted when direct observation by the court is essential, and it may involve expert witnesses to assist in the process. If logistical or financial constraints prevent bringing the subject of inspection to the court, an on-site inspection is performed. Documents serve as critical evidence, particularly public records issued by governmental or legal entities, which carry the presumption of accuracy. Properly certified international documents hold the same evidentiary value as domestic ones, subject to reciprocity agreements. Parties must submit relevant documents to support their claims, and foreign-language documents must be accompanied by a certified translation. If a party cannot obtain a document from a government body, institution, or another party, the court may intervene to procure its submission, with certain exceptions. Witness testimonies are another vital form of evidence, as individuals summoned as witnesses are generally obligated to testify unless exempt by law. Certain privileged communications, such as those protected by attorney-client privilege or professional secrecy, may justify refusal to testify. Witnesses may also decline to answer specific questions if doing so would expose them or their relatives to severe embarrassment, financial harm, or criminal liability. However, they must appear when summoned, with penalties for non-compliance, and are entitled to reimbursement for travel, accommodation, and lost wages. Expert testimonies become necessary when specialized knowledge is required to interpret technical matters. The proposing party must define the scope of expert evaluation, and in cases of complexity, courts may appoint alternative experts. Experts must submit their findings in writing before trial, and if their reports are unclear, contradictory, or incomplete, the court may request clarification or appoint another expert. Experts are entitled to compensation for their work. Finally, party testimonies may be ordered by the court to establish facts. If a party refuses to testify or fails to appear, the court proceeds with the available evidence, but no coercive measures can be applied to compel a party’s testimony.

Judicial discretion plays a pivotal role in resolving discovery disputes, as courts evaluate the weight of evidence and the reasons for non-compliance before making determinations. Certain procedural orders, such as the appointment of experts or mandates to produce documents, are final and cannot be appealed, ensuring the efficiency and integrity of the discovery process.

6.3. How is evidence presented and evaluated during litigation?

The presentation and evaluation of evidence during litigation follow a structured process set at the preliminary hearing. Each party bears the responsibility of presenting evidence to substantiate their claims and refute opposing arguments, with documentary evidence required in its original or certified form and foreign-language documents necessitating an official translation. Witnesses and experts contribute through oral or written testimonies, with their statements recorded by the court. Witnesses are examined individually – first by the party that summoned them, followed by cross-examination from the opposing party – while the court may intervene with additional inquiries to clarify inconsistencies and assess credibility. Experts, on the other hand, must substantiate their findings with precise scientific, technical, or professional justifications. The admissibility of evidence is determined by the court, which evaluates its relevance, authenticity, and probative value, ensuring that only legally sound and materially significant evidence is considered. Special weight is granted to public records unless successfully contested.

In assessing the credibility and consistency of all presented evidence, the court weighs its significance, drawing conclusions based on the balance of probabilities. Ultimately, the court’s rationale behind its evidentiary determinations is explicitly articulated in its final ruling, reinforcing transparency, accountability, and the integrity of the judicial process.

7. Enforcement of Judgments

7.1. What types of judgments can be issued in civil litigation, and how are they enforced?

Civil court judgments are classified based on scope, procedural basis, legal protection provided, and the success of the plaintiff’s claim.

In terms of scope, courts issue final judgments that comprehensively resolve the main dispute along with any related claims, ensuring a conclusive legal determination. Partial judgments may be rendered when only certain claims are ripe for resolution, allowing for a phased approach to adjudication. Preliminary judgments enable the court to first establish the legal basis of a claim before ruling on the extent of liability or damages, while supplemental judgments address any claims inadvertently omitted in prior rulings, ensuring completeness in judicial decisions.

From a procedural standpoint, courts may render contradictory judgments, following a full trial where both parties have had the opportunity to present their case. Alternatively, courts may issue summary judgments, including judgments based on admission, where the defendant concedes the plaintiff’s claim; judgments based on withdrawal, when the plaintiff voluntarily renounces the claim; and absence judgments, where the defendant does not contest the claim by the preparatory hearing.

Regarding the legal effect, declaratory judgments serve to establish the existence or non-existence of a legal right, obligation, or relationship, such as confirming property ownership, the validity of a contract, or legal status. Condemnatory judgments impose an obligation on the defendant to perform, omit, or abstain from a specific action, including payment of a debt, delivery of goods, fulfillment of contractual duties, or refraining from unlawful conduct. Meanwhile, constitutive (transformative) judgments alter legal relationships by creating, modifying, or terminating a legal status, such as in divorce or contract annulment, with their legal effect taking place automatically upon finalization.

Finally, judgments are also classified based on case outcome, either granting the plaintiff’s claim and providing the requested relief or rejecting the claim as unfounded.

The court may also issue a payment order, a simplified court procedure designed for the collection of monetary claims that are supported by reliable documents, such as public records, notarized private documents, invoices, and certified business records. The court issues the payment order without a hearing, requiring the defendant to fulfill the claim within eight days (or three days for bills of exchange and checks), unless a valid objection is filed within the prescribed period. Additionally, upon Montenegro’s accession to the European Union, the country will implement the European Payment Order Procedure in accordance with EU Regulation No. 1896/2006, which introduces a uniform system for cross-border debt recovery. Under this framework, Basic Courts and the Commercial Court of Montenegro will have jurisdiction over European payment order requests, while the court that issued the order will also be responsible for certifying its enforceability.

Once a civil court judgment becomes final and enforceable, it must be executed through voluntary compliance or compulsory enforcement. The enforcement process is governed by the Law on Enforcement and Security and is carried out primarily by public bailiffs.

The losing party is expected to fulfill the court’s ruling within the timeframe specified in the judgment. If the judgment does not specify a deadline, the standard period for voluntary compliance is 15 days from the date of finality. In commercial disputes deadline for fulfilling an obligation is eight days from the date the judgment becomes final and enforceable, while, for obligations that do not involve monetary payments, the court has the discretion to set a longer deadline based on the nature of the obligation and the specific circumstances of the case.

If the obligated party fails to voluntarily comply with a court judgment, the prevailing party may initiate enforcement proceedings by submitting a request to the competent court or a public bailiff. Public bailiffs are primarily responsible for executing enforcement measures, except in cases where the court has exclusive jurisdiction, such as the enforcement of decisions related to child custody and return, reinstatement of employees, and obligations requiring personal performance by the debtor. The public bailiff determines and executes enforcement based on an enforceable court decision or official document, with jurisdiction depending on the location of the debtor’s residence or business headquarters.

For monetary judgments, enforcement measures include seizure and liquidation of assets, targeting movable and immovable property, bank accounts, wages, shares, and financial instruments. When enforcing against movable assets, the process begins with inventory and valuation, where the public bailiff seizes items from the debtor’s possession or third parties. These assets are then sold through public auctions or direct negotiation, with the proceeds used to settle debts in a specific order: first covering enforcement costs, then satisfying creditor claims, and finally returning any surplus to the debtor. Similarly, bank accounts and wages can be frozen and garnished, though protected income sources, such as social benefits and child support, remain exempt.

In non-monetary judgments, enforcement mechanisms include eviction orders, where the public bailiff executes the removal of occupants and hands over real estate to the rightful party; specific performance orders, compelling the obligated party to fulfill a duty, with possible fines for non-compliance or third-party intervention at the debtor’s expense; and return of goods or assets, where a public bailiff seizes and restores specific items to the claimant. When reinstating dismissed employees, public bailiffs impose fines on employers and ensure compensation for unpaid wages. In matters of child custody and visitation rights, non-compliant guardians may face fines, police intervention, or imprisonment if they obstruct court-ordered child handovers. Lastly, bailiffs enforce the registration of property rights by ensuring land registry updates, ownership transfers, and legal modifications in public records.

7.2. Are there specific provisions for cross-border litigation or enforcement of foreign judgments?

International Private Law Act sets out conflict-of-law rules to determine the applicable law in private legal matters with an international dimension. Furthermore, it governs the jurisdiction of courts and other competent authorities in adjudicating such disputes and sets forth procedural rules for handling cross-border cases. This legislation also regulates the recognition and enforcement of foreign judicial decisions. In aligning its legal framework with European Union (EU) standards, Montenegro’s International Private Law Act incorporates conflict-of-law provisions governing contractual and non-contractual obligations. In this regard, the choice of applicable law in contractual relationships is interpreted and applied in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 (Rome I) of the European Parliament and the Council, dated June 17, 2008. Likewise, the rules regarding the law applicable to non-contractual obligations are aligned with Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 (Rome II), dated July 17, 2007.

Montenegro has further solidified its commitment to international judicial cooperation by actively engaging in the Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH). As a member of the HCCH since 2007, Montenegro has acceded to 13 HCCH conventions, underscoring its commitment to the modernization of its legal system. Among the most notable agreements, Montenegro ratified the Hague Convention of June 30, 2005 on Choice of Court Agreements, which entered into force on August 1, 2018. Additionally, Montenegro signed the Hague Convention of July 2, 2019 on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters on April 21, 2023, further reinforcing its dedication to international legal cooperation and the facilitation of cross-border dispute resolution. Montenegro is also a contracting state to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, commonly known as the New York Convention. The country confirmed its succession to the convention on October 23 , 2006, following its declaration of independence.

When it comes to enforcement of foreign judgments, before enforcement can be carried out, the foreign enforceable title must first be recognized by a competent Montenegrin court. The recognition procedure follows an extra-judicial process under a system of limited control, meaning that local courts do not review the merits of the foreign judgment but only assess whether it meets the legal conditions prescribed by the law. A foreign decision may either be recognized or refused recognition, but it cannot be altered, supplemented, or modified in any way. A foreign judgment will not be recognized if the subject matter falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of Montenegrin courts, if the foreign court exercised jurisdiction based on grounds not recognized under Montenegrin law, if a final decision has already been issued by a Montenegrin court or another foreign judgment on the same matter has been recognized in Montenegro, or if recognition of the judgment would be manifestly contrary to Montenegrin public policy. Additionally, recognition may be refused if the defendant was denied the opportunity to participate in the proceedings. If the local court finds no legal obstacles to recognition, and the party seeking recognition submits all required documents, the court will issue a decision granting recognition and enforceability of the foreign judgment. Once recognized, the foreign decision carries the same legal effect as a domestic court ruling and can be enforced accordingly.

8. Appeal

8.1. What is the appeals process, and what are the grounds for appeal in your jurisdiction?

In civil litigation, an appeal can be filed against judgments and rulings issued in first-instance proceedings. The appeal must be submitted within 15 days from the date the judgment is delivered or from the date the written copy is received. In certain cases, such as commercial disputes, labor disputes, bill of exchange and check disputes, and possession disturbance disputes, the appeal deadline is eight days. The appeal is initially filed with the court that issued the contested decision, which then forwards it to the competent second-instance court.

An appeal can be based on several grounds, including: (i) substantial violation of civil procedure provisions – which includes significant procedural errors that may have affected the fairness of the trial, (ii) incorrect or incomplete establishment of facts – if the court failed to establish the facts correctly or overlooked crucial evidence, and/or (iii) misapplication of substantive law – when the court incorrectly interprets or applies the relevant laws to the case.

When the case files related to an appeal reach the second-instance court, the reporting judge prepares a report for the appellate panel’s review. The second-instance court decides on the appeal either in a panel session or after holding a hearing and has several options regarding the appeal: it may dismiss the appeal if it is untimely, incomplete, or not allowed; reject the appeal as unfounded and confirm the first-instance judgment; annul the first-instance judgment and return the case for retrial; annul the first-instance judgment and dismiss the lawsuit; annul the first-instance judgment and order the lower court to draft a new judgment; annul the first-instance judgment and decide on the parties’ claims; or modify the first-instance judgment. A first-instance judgment may be annulled and the case returned to the first-instance court for retrial only once based on an appeal. This rule ensures that a case is not repeatedly sent back for retrial, so if an appeal is filed again after the retrial, the second-instance court must decide the case on its merits.

9. Costs and Funding

9.1. How are legal costs determined, and what are the common practices regarding funding litigation?

Legal costs are determined based on court fees, attorney fees, expert fees, and other procedural expenses. The allocation and calculation of these costs are primarily governed by the Law on Court Fees, the Law on Civil Procedure, and the Attorney Tariff Regulations. The key components include:

Court Fees that are fixed by law and depend on the type and value of the dispute. Higher-value claims incur higher court fees, payable at different stages of litigation (filing, appeal, enforcement).

Attorney Fees are determined based on the Montenegrin Bar Association’s tariff, which prescribes fees for different legal services. Fees may be fixed, hourly, or success-based in certain cases.

During litigation, each party is responsible for covering its own legal expenses, including court fees, attorney fees, and other procedural costs. If additional services such as expert opinions or translations are required, the party requesting them must advance the costs, unless the court determines otherwise. However, the prevailing principle in litigation is “loser pays”, meaning that the losing party bears the legal costs of both sides unless the court finds circumstances warranting a different allocation. In cases of partial success, courts may order a proportional distribution of costs, ensuring a fair and equitable approach to expense allocation.

9.2. Are there alternative funding options available for parties involved in litigation?

Free legal aid is available under specific conditions, as outlined by the Law on Free Legal Aid, providing financial assistance for legal consultation, representation, and procedural costs. Legal aid may be granted for various legal matters, including civil, criminal, family, administrative, and enforcement proceedings, ensuring access to justice for those unable to afford legal representation. Once approved, it also provides exemption from court costs, except for the costs of legal representatives and opposing party expenses.

Eligible individuals include Montenegrin citizens, stateless persons, foreign nationals seeking asylum or under subsidiary protection, and foreigners with permanent or temporary residence. Additionally, individuals in vulnerable social and legal situations, such as recipients of social welfare benefits, children without parental care, persons with disabilities, victims of domestic violence, human trafficking, torture, degrading treatment, sexual violence, and economically disadvantaged individuals, may also qualify.

The scope of free legal aid includes legal consultation, preparation of legal documents, and representation before courts, the State Prosecutor’s Office, the Constitutional Court, alternative dispute resolution bodies, public bailiffs, and administrative authorities. It also covers notarial proceedings related to inheritance cases and translation costs for sign language users. However, free legal aid does not apply to cases before Commercial Courts, business registration disputes, defamation and insult-related damage claims, child support reduction cases where the debtor has defaulted, and enforcement proceedings based on an authentic document.

10. International Treaties

10.1. How do international treaties or regional agreements impact litigation in your jurisdiction?

International treaties and regional agreements have primacy over domestic law. According to the Constitution of Montenegro, ratified and published international treaties, along with generally accepted rules of international law, are an integral part of the domestic legal order. They supersede national legislation and apply directly when they regulate matters differently from domestic law. This means that in Montenegrin courts when a conflict arises between a domestic law and an international treaty to which Montenegro is a party, the provisions of the treaty prevail. This principle ensures that international legal commitments are upheld and directly enforceable, shaping judicial decision-making and legal reasoning.

Montenegro has established several treaties, primarily on a bilateral level, which govern cooperation in litigation and the enforcement of court decisions. These agreements facilitate cross-border legal processes and ensure that judgments made in one jurisdiction are recognized and enforced in others. Such treaties are in place with countries like Serbia, Croatia, and Italy.