Saturday, December 21, 2013

Entering, staying and working conditions in Hungary in case of Third country nationals

1.      Short term stay (not exceeding the 90 days period)

Nationals of countries listed in the 539/2001 EC council regulation Annex II. („Visa-free nationals”) may enter Hungary without a visa, however nationals of countries not listed in the council regulation/countries under visa obligation („Visa nationals”) - even if they are family members of EU/EEA citizens - will need to apply for a visa or a residence permit before entering Hungary (Visa free nationals and Visa nationals collectively: „Third country nationals”). Visa-free nationals and Visa nationals entering Hungary with a visa are entitled to stay in Hungary only for 90 days.

2.      Entry for long stay (period exceeding 90 days)

Third country nationals intending to stay in Hungary for more than 90 days shall apply for a residence permit. The type and the validity of the residence permit depends on the purpose of stay. The resident permit may be issued for the following purposes: visitation, gainful activity, education, family reunification, medical treatment, research work, voluntary activity or official purpose. In case the stay does not fall in the categories above, it may be issued for another purpose. To obtain such a residence permit the applicants shall prove not only the purpose of their stay, but also their livelihood, housing and all inclusive health insurance. Usually the residence permit may be issued for a maximum of two years, but after this period it can be renewed for two further years.

Third country nationals are entitled to become a permanent resident of Hungary, after a five-year period of uninterrupted legal residence in the territory of Hungary.

3.      Working in Hungary

Third country nationals – except family members of EU/EEA citizens - may only work in Hungary based on a permit. The work permit may be issued if the employer has a valid labor need in relation to the activity to be performed by the applicant. Once issued, the work permit is valid for a maximum of two years, but it can be renewed for an additional two-year period.


Should you have any questions regarding this post, feel free to contact Dr. Miriam Bukovics or

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

Entering, staying and working conditions in Hungary in case of EU/EEA citizens

1.      Entry for 90 days

Citizens of the European Union and nationals of the states of the European Economic Area („EU citizens/EEA nationals”) with the right of free movement may enter Hungary in possession of their valid passport or personal identity card. EU citizens/EEA nationals are entitled to stay in Hungary for 90 days without the obligation to report their presence and certify the legality of their stay.
2.      Stay exceeding 90 days

In case the EU citizens/EEA nationals intend to stay in Hungary for more than 90 days they shall apply to the Regional Directorate of the Office of Immigration and Nationality for a registration certificate during the 90 days-stay period. To obtain such a certificate EU citizens/EEA nationals need to prove their employment relationship, livelihood, housing and comprehensive health insurance. If all necessary documents are collected, the duration of the procedure will take only thirty minutes. The registration certificate is issued for an indefinite period and will lose its validity if the right of residence itself is terminated. It is important to note that EU citizens/EEA nationals cannot be expelled for failing to register, but they may be fined.
EU citizens/EEA nationals are entitled to become a permanent resident of Hungary, only after a five-year period of uninterrupted legal residence.

3.      Working in Hungary

EU citizens/EEA nationals are allowed to enter employment in Hungary without permission. However, the employer shall submit a notification in relation to the employment of such persons to the local employment office not later than on the first working day.
Should you have any questions related to this topic, please do not hesitate to contact us:

Thursday, October 24, 2013

How to buy a Hungarian residence permit?

Believe it or not, it is now possible for foreigners to “buy” a Hungarian residence permit, as  the Decree of the Ministry for National Economy has entered into force on 20 February  2013, it has established the so called „residency bonds”. Pursuant to the provisions of this Decree - amending the Act on the Entry and Stay of Third-Country Nationals – Third-Country Nationals, whose investments in Hungary qualify their entry and stay as being in the interest of the economy at large may receive a residence permit with preferential conditions.

Previously three years of a continuous Hungarian residency was the pre-condition for a permanent residence permit, moreover such permit had a limited duration of at least three months and not more than two years.

The validity period of this special residence permit - acquired through the residency bonds – shall be five years at most, and it may be also extended by maximum five additional years at a time. However, it is still a required, that the applicant:

-          has a place of residence in the territory of Hungary,

-          has  a clean criminal record,

-          is not considered to be a threat to the national security of Hungary.

It shall be considered as a national economic interest, if the applicant certifies, that he/she or the company in which he/she holds a majority of shares, has bought government bonds worth at least EUR 250,000, with a duration of five years. The government bonds are  put into circulation by the Hungarian Government Debt Management Agency Private Company Limited by Shares (hereinafter: “ÁKK”). ÁKK undertakes that it pays off the full amount of government bond’s nominal value at the end of maturity.

Based on the information received from ÁKK, the Parliamentary Committee for Economic Affairs will approve separate enterprises, which will establish contractual relations with the foreign applicants. These enterprises will buy the desired government bonds for the foreign individuals. Eventually, the applicants have to attach a final and irrevocable declaration of the enterprise, that it will use the applicant’s contribution for subscribing the government bond for a nominal value of at least EUR 250,000, and will do so within 45 days after the issue date of the applicant’s residence permit. The enterprises will be entitled to make the purchase declarations for a maximum of two trading days per calendar month as predetermined by ÁKK. One series will be introduced to the market per year and the offering price rate is calculated upon the applied interest rate set by ÁKK at the introduction of the given series.
The bond is issued at a discount price, reduced with the interest, where the discount interest rate at the time the bond is issued is 1.5 percentage points lower,- but no less than 2%- than the most similar five-year secondary market yield of the euro-denominated bond with residual maturity issued by the Hungarian State.

If You, or any acquaintance you know is interested in buying residency bonds, or would like to receive more information on the aforementioned, or might need help with any other immigration cases, please do not hesitate to contact us and our experts will be at your kind disposal.

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Community air carriers’ liability

What are the obligations of Community air carriers as regards the nature and limits of their liability in the event of accidents such as death or injury,   destroyed, lost or damaged baggage?
Death or injury
The air carrier is liable in the event of death, wounding or any other bodily injury to a passenger, if the accident took place on board an aircraft or during any of the embarking or disembarking operations.
There is no financial limit to the liability for damages in respect of death or injury. However, for damages up to 100.000 SDR[1], the air carrier cannot contest claims for compensation. In excess of that amount, the air carrier can defend itself against a claim only by proving that it was not negligent or otherwise at fault.
Destruction, loss or damage to baggage
The air carrier is liable for the destroyed, lost or damaged baggage in case the event caused the damage took place on board an aircraft or happened during the period of within which the baggage was in the charge of the carrier. In the case of checked baggage, the air carrier is liable even if not at fault, unless the baggage is detective or the damage resulted from an inherent defect, quality or vice of the baggage. In the case of unchecked baggage, the air carrier is only liable if at fault, however at this time the burden proof is on the passenger.
When the baggage is destroyed, lost or damaged the air carrier is liable up to 1000 SDR for each passenger. The European Court of Justice stated in its recent decision that this compensation including the total damage caused, regardless of whether that damage is material on non-material, except when a special declaration and an additional payment is made at the checking-counter by the passenger.

Passenger, baggage delay
Additionally, when flight is canceled or significantly delayed, passengers may be entitled to compensation depending on the delay length and the flight distance.
The air carrier is liable up to 4150 SDR in case of passenger delay, and up to 1000 SDR in case of baggage delay unless it proves that took all reasonable measures to avoid the damage or it was impossible to take such measures.
Claiming compensation
If baggage is delayed, destroyed, lost or damaged the passenger must write and complain to air carrier as soon as possible. In the case of damage, the complaint must be made within 7 days and within 21 days in the case of delay, in both cases from the date on which the baggage was placed at the passenger’s disposal.
Any action in court to claim damages must be taken within 2 years from the date of arrival of the aircraft or from the date on which the aircraft ought to have arrived.

In both cases, if no complaint was made within the given deadline, no action shall lie against the airline.
We at BWSP Gobert and Partners are constantly at your diposal! Should you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact us!

[1] special drawing rights, as defined by the Monetary fund

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Articles to Love II
Starting the wedding planning - procedure before the Registrar and deadlines

Marrying parties have to announce their intent to a marriage contract jointly and in person at the Register Office, which is operating as a registry group next to the Mayors‘ Office in each self government. The announcement may happen at any Register Office, it is not subject to domicile or residence.

The earliest date of the announcement is 6 months before the wedding day, however the earliest day of the wedding is the 31th day following the announcement at the Registrar. An exception could be from the latter if the notary grants exemption or in an extreme case, when either party to a marriage is in a medical condition threatening with near death.

Following the announcement of the marriage intent, the Registrar examines if there is a legal impediment to the marriage. Such legal impediment is, if a person being under conservatorship whishes to enter a marriage, or if he is not under guardianship, but at the time of the marriage contract he was incompetent, except that the latter person being already in the possession of a legal capacity, subsequently approves the marriage. Another impediment to a valid marriage is, when the Registrar does not act in his official quality or if the parties to the marriage contract were not jointly present when expressing their marriage intent.

The marriage ceremony is void also in the case when the previous marriage or a previous registered partnership status still exists, furthermore in case of a marriage between direct line (ancestors, descendants) relatives, adoptive and adoptee, siblings.

Albeit it is void, the Registrar may grant exemption in respect of a marriage with the siblings‘ bloodline descendent, or with the ex spouses‘ direct line relative (for example when the spouse marries the ex spouses‘ ancestors or descendants, that is with her ex father in law, or ex mother in law, or with a stepchild).

It is important to mention, that if our beloved is not a Hungarian, but a foregnier citizen, generally proper documents certifying the existence of the legal conditions need to be obtained from the consulate, which means we need to calculate a proper time for this too and please check the competent embassies consulate department about the documens which need to be obtained, also the necessary time input and the possible costs.

After the announcement, the Registrar examines the existence of the necessary legal conditions for the marriage. If there is no legal impediment to the marriage contract, he invites the parties to the marriage to pay a determined fee.

The Registrar is entitled for a fee defined in the legal acts. However, we may see differing conditions regarding the fees in each self government, that is why it is also advisable to inform ourselves on the governing provisions in the given self government. A seperate fee may apply in cases, when the marriage takes place at the weekend, furthermore it is applicable when we plan a marriage outside the self governments‘ premises, which is in fact ensured free of charge, or seperate fee applies if we would like to host beyond the witnesses and the parties to the marriage more guests on the civil wedding ceremony and for this reason we are required to use other premises suitable for the mariage contract.

It is very important to determine the time, while it may happen that the marriage is not possible on the given wedding day at the given selfgovernment. Unfortunately, in practice we may meet with cases like this as well.

If all the necessary fees have been paid, we must choose our wittnesses. It is usual to invite one-one witness from both the husbends‘ and the wifes‘ side. It is important to note that the witness must be of a legal age, must have a capacity and is able to be present on the wedding day to be able to sign the marriage certificate. If we wish to conclude a marriage with a foreign citizen who does not speaks the Hungarian language, we need to take care of the presence of an interpreter. Please see also the rules on bearing a name in a separate box.

After making the above decesions we have nothing else to do than to announce the beatific „I do“!

We at BWSP Gobert and Partners are constantly at your diposal! Should you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact us!

Tuesday, July 9, 2013

The legal pitfalls of a wedding

Articles to love

On the legal pitfalls of a wedding

Under engagement we mean the state, when according to the generally accepted customs, (albeit far from exclusively) the man decides to propose his beloved, women of his dreams. As a symbol of a commitment, the groom puts the engagment ring on the ring finger of his - bride to be, which is usually followed by cheers and tears of happiness – in a base case. But what happens if tears of happiness turn to anger and  fury? Lets see who gets the last laugh in cases like that.

Examining this event from a legal perspective, when the dialougue „Will you marry me?“ „Yes!“ takes place, a verbal agreement is concluded between the parties, which is traditionally confirmed by putting the ring on the finger, as an implicit conduct.

But what happens if we have already ordered all proprieties of our expensive weeding and the beatific „i do“ is only a few days away, albeit instead of that either party suddenly backs out from the planned joyful event.

First, we examine as an example the event when the bride realizes that she does not want a wedding yet, or she does, but not with the current groom. What happens to the engagemnet ring in cases like that? Although, if we relay on traditions, the generous gentlement might be hurt, but he will not ask the engagement ring he bought back, albeit legally he would have an opportunity to do so. The Donor may revoke the engagement ring, if he donated it exclusively in the hope of a conclusion of a marriage, and this presumption for which the handover of the engagement ring happened, later – not from the fault of a donating groom – shatteres definitely.

It has to be noted that in the case of a gift of a common value and in the case of forgivness – for example if the groom does not asks the engagement ring back for a longer period without a proper reason -  revokation cannot take place.

As a further example lets see the situation, when the groom backs out from the wedding, moreover only few days before the planned wedding day, which means that all service agreements are concluded, wedding and bridal dress ordered with all the accessories thereof, the wedding cake chosen, the location booked. With a view to the fact that a wedding in most cases has very significant costs - usually only per day , how are we able to enforce our claim for damage?

If the bride could trust in good will that the marriage would be entered, whilst all steps towards the wedding planning and the undertaking of commitments had happened with a substantiated reason, furthermore they had been made based on the grooms motive of the intentional implicit conduct, and on the promise of a marriage contract, the bride will derive a claim for damage caused by incetement, which can be enforced before court.
Should  you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact us!
This article was written by: dr. Nora Marinescu, Senior Associate
BWSP Gobert and Partners

Thursday, April 11, 2013

Our office now has an exciting new Image film. Feel free to have a look!
Last week our labour team won the first Hungarian case regarding the unfair dismissal of a blogger.

Due to this we found it is time to focus on some labour law related issues regarding social media, as it is continuously growing in importance in the labour law area.
The first post relating to this issue:

LinkedIn - LinkedOut
- in other words who is entitled to your contact network?

Does the employer have right to ask for the employees contact list from his LinkedIn account, when terminating his employment relationship?

According to an English judgement yes, what’s more he may even oblige him to delete the entire account. Pertaining to the judgement the contact network established whilst being in employment relationship as database, is the employer’s property.

It is against the judgement that according to the LinkedIn’s terms and conditions of usage the user accounts (if the employee establishes them in his own name, not on behalf of the employer) are registered under a user name, therefore they constitute the user’s “property”. Consequently an employer may not force the employee to hand over his account, user name or password.

Nevertheless, it does answer the question, because as the judgement points it out as well, the employer does not prohibit the employee from his user account, but from using the database, which the employee gathered in the work time and on the employer’s expenses, moreover in the given lawsuit, he stored by using the employer’s IT system. Is it conceivable to draw conclusions on such score in Hungary also?

The possibility to successfully argue before the court is not excluded. The key question is in fact whether a contact list built on LinkedIn in the course of employment relationship, is regarded trade secret (confidential information), which is then the employer’s property. Obviously telephone numbers, email addresses themselves are not confidential information, however setting up contact lists pertaining to several specified areas requires investment from the company and their disclosure to competitor represents significant trade value. According to the Hungarian law, the database is under copyright protection (and as far as employer applies appropriate employment contracts), the established intellectual creation in course of the employment relationship (or with the employer’s equipments) belongs to the employer. In the case of A Hays Specialist Recruitment (Holdings) Ltd & Another –v- Ions & Another the court declared that the employer is entitled to permit and encourage the employee to build contact network on the internet, however these contact data are considered as information of an confidential character established in the employment relationship, therefore they belong to the employer. The judgment does not include clear standpoint on whose property is the contact list created on LinkedIn, however the following conclusion can be drawn from it: any database containing client contact data, built in the course of the employment relationship, is the employers property, and if an employee’s employment relationship terminates he needs to turn in this database to the employer.

During such procedure the employees may argue, that they need the database and that it is based on their personal knowledge, therefore it is not the employer’s property. Thus the aforementioned judgement (although it has not took a clear position in this matter) may let us draw the conclusion that the employee, when terminating his employment relationship, is obliged to transfer or delete the client contact database, together with his LinkedIn account created in the course of employment (regardless whether he established the account in his name, or in the employer’s).

Penwell Publishing (UK) Ltd Ltd –v- Ornstein & Others case contains even more precise conclusion, where the Court stated that direct phone numbers and email addresses pertaining to client contacts, are regarded as being confidential information and if the employee obtained these during his employment relationship, the information constitute the property of the employer. The Court has not contested that the publicly accessible information, such as the registered seat of the company and the publicly accessible phone numbers do not fall within this protected scope. Moreover in the Penwell-case the dismissed employee stored these information in the employers outlook system, continuously refreshed on the employers server and not on LinkedIn website and external servers. Taking into account these particular circumstances the Court found undoubtedly justified that the data are in the property of the employer, because they have obviously been collected in the course of employment, obviously stored on the IT systems owned by the employers, thus the contact data could not be considered the employee’s private information.
These two judgments indicate that it is more and more suggested and needed to create a regulation governing the social networking sites, therefore if it is formulated as an unambiguous and specific expectation from the employer’s side, that the employee may not take away the contact list built on the employer’s expenses, he may later not have objections against it. It may be clearly stipulated in the regulation, that upon the termination of the employment relationship those client contacts which the employee gathered in the course of employment must be deleted. It is even a safer solution, if these conditions are stipulated in the employment contract, even if having only a general character. On the other hand it is also in the interest of the employees, thus they might be aware right at the beginning of the employment relationship, what rights are they entitled for upon the termination of the employment relationship and what is the employer’s attitude to building client contacts, having specific view to the non-competition provisions. It arises as a legal question, whether it is a non-competition stipulation if the employee after the termination of the employment relationship should restrain from maintaining contact with certain clients (in which case the condition of validity is the payment of counter value).
According to my standpoint, similarly in case of provisions pertaining to trade secrets, the correctly formulated legal documents may reduce this risk. Prohibition from competition – as arising from its character – means that the employee restrains to engage in activities at the competitors. The employer’s requirement for the contact network is certainly not of such character. If it is not defined in the employment contract or a separate regulation what happens with the LinkedIn account, it is advisable to clarify in what manner and into what extent may the employee keep the contact network he built by the help and in the interest of the employer. Instead of the legal twist and turn, in the practice it is even a more simple solution that the employee may not use, other than equipments owned by the employer and this equipment he is obliged to return upon the termination of the employment relationship without making a copy it.
Naturally the employee may not be hindered from using the earlier created copy database for own purposes in the future. In the case of the LinkedIn contact networks, the employer may easily and externally follow what contact changes does the ex-employee have. If the mutual agreement explicitly regulated the contact system, “private actions” conducted after the termination of the employment relationship may even be sanctioned.

For more information, please contact:
Dr. Andrea Klára Soós

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

New Labour Code - New employment contract?

The Act I of 2012 on the Hungarian Labour Code (“LC”) featured numerous novelties, since it has recently entered into force 1 January 2013, therefore it is worth to review among our own companies if there are any contracts which possibly need modification, as well as the applied methods and behavior upon selecting a future employee, equally from an employer and an employee point of view. Additionally, in case of certain legal conditions the already existing employment contracts’ modification may be necessary.

I.                    The right to lie – is lying allowed in an employment relationship?

In the course of establishing a new employment relationship, that is typically in job interviews a large amount of information is exchanged within a short period of time, but what are the limits which are permissible and where is the fine line which stirs up the rules of the expected behavior and the parties’ mutual cooperation obligation in such situation?

The data protection commissioner’s principle on the right to lie is acknowledged and applied by the judicial practice as well, but let us take a closer look at what all this means.

The most practical example for the above is upon establishing or existing of an employment relationship, if the employer asks questions regarding the employee’s family planning intentions, this qualifies as the employer's breach of its cooperation obligation. Given that as a response to such occurrence it is not expectable from the employee’s side to fulfill the proper cooperation – as this is a question regarding the most private and intimate spheres of the employee - therefore the employee has the right to lie regarding the information on family planning.

Similar questions may be raised regarding the test series used to measure the adequacy to the given field of work. Most employees usually without any questioning undertake such tests, thinking that it is part of their job duties, or expect to acquire the position they are applying for specifically through participating. In these cases also there are permissible factors as well as ones that go beyond what is acceptable.

Psychological and various other types of personality tests, further the analyzing methods thereof are becoming more and more common. However, it is less commonly known that for the employers to receive knowledge on any conclusions from test results which regard the personality of the employee, the previous consent of the employee must be granted.

In practice, the approval of the employee is considered to be granted upon the fact that the employee undertakes such psychological test. However, it is important to know that the employee is entitled to a reservation right. This means that the employee can learn about the personality test results prior to the employer, and based on the results can decide whether the employer should recognize the results of the test already analyzed or not. The precondition for the employee to practice such right to decide on the aforementioned is the proper discretion and cooperation of the human resources (HR) department.

II. New workplace - new employment contract?

It is a novelty in the LC that the compulsory content elements of the employment contract have been modified. Unlike the previous regulation, besides the salary and the job description, the location of where the work is performed, that is the workplace must no longer be determined in the employment contract. Let us take a look at what this means in practice.

If the employment contract was concluded prior to when the new LC entered into force, that is prior to 1  January  2013, and the contracting parties indicated the workplace as a variable workplace, then according to the new labor law regulations the applicable workplace is where the employee usually performs the work.

According to the previous regulations, based on the variable workplace, the employer was entitled – within the legal framework - to unilaterally impose on the employee, when to work in which branch or work site. This type of labour law clause is not legitimate anymore as of 1 January 2013; therefore solely referring to the variable nature of a workplace in employment contracts is no longer possible.

If the parties have previously agreed a variable workplace, however the employer would like to hire the employee for work to be performed previously from one branch in future at another branch permanently, then the modification of the employment contract is necessary. The same case applies when the employer’s registered seat is indicated as the workplace; however the registered seat changes in the meantime. These kinds of problems can be prevented with the wording whereas the employer's workplace is determined for example as the “all-time prevailing” registered seat of the employer.

Upon determining the employers “all-time prevailing” registered seat as the workplace the legitimate right of withdrawal must be taken into account. If any significant change regarding the prevailing conditions of the employment contract has occurred since the establishment of the employment relationship, which makes the continuation of the employment impossible (objective circumstance – for example the daily commute to the workplace would take up more time than the daily work hours), or which would mean disproportionate harm (subjective circumstance - for example the mother of a young child would not be able to pick up her child on time form the kindergarten), then the employee is entitled to rescission from the employment contract.

However, it is not excluded to indicate a broader geographic location, such as a county or city. It is important though to handle even broader definitions than the aforementioned cautiously, whereas in accordance with the judicial practice, such determinations as "Hungary" or "Europe" as workplace are no longer considered as legitimate provisions. In this case the requirements for proper practice of rights and reasonable procedure also prevail.

It is important to emphasize in connection with the workplace, that if the employer’s intention for termination notice is due to the employee's ability or reasons related to the employer’s operations, then the termination of the employment relationship is considered as legitimate, if within the indicated workplace (or in lack of such determination, where the employee usually carries out the work) there is no opening for any other job which requires the employer’s ability, education or experience.

That is, if for example the employer indicated its work sites as the employee’s workplace, then each and every one of the employer's work sites must be separately examined as per whether there is a possible open position for the employee based on the aforementioned conditions.  Therefore, it is worth taking proper care that the employment contract to be concluded bears a realistic content, which includes the actual workplace and reflects the generally usual work circumstances.
For further questions please contact:
or feel free to call us under 003612709900

Friday, February 1, 2013

Audit Services of the Hungarian DPA

Audit Services of the Hungarian DPA

As from 1 January 2012 the Hungarian DPA opens its services for providing audit services. The audit service is regulated by the Privacy Act, however data controllers and experts still have a lot of concerns regarding the service. In Hungary no other authority has the same entitlement.
According to chapter 39 of the Privacy Act the data protection audit „is a service provided by the authority designed to evaluate and assess data processing operations in progress or proposed along technical merits, intended to effectively implement a high level of data protection and data security system”. The unclear wording of the act raises concerns and suggests that it is possible to request that the authority analyze the technical system and safety of the technical equipment used by the data controllers. Proposed data processing operations may be audited if deemed justified based on the elaboration of the data processing concept.
The audit service can be conducted by the Authority solely at the data controller’s request. It is not clear, whether it can be requested by any of the controllers if there are more than one controllers, or the controllers shall request it jointly.  For the data protection audit an administrative service fee shall be charged in the amount decreed by the relevant minister. This fee is not yet made available to public, however, based on official communications it will be determined on a case by case basis.
 The Authority records the results of the data protection audit in also called audit report, however there are no guidelines for the minimum content of such report. The audit report may also contain recommendations for the data controller. The audit report shall be considered public, unless the controller requests otherwise.
 It is important to note that the audit service does not qualify as negative clearance, the authority may open any procedure during the audit. However, if the data controller complies with the recommendations of the authority, no fines can be applied for the same conduct.

If you have any questions regarding this issue, feel free to contact our Partner:

Dr. Andrea Klára Soós

+ 36 1 270 99 00

Wednesday, January 23, 2013

The term of “family” cannot be limited to the relationship of a man and a woman


The Constitutional Court – with its ruling No. II/3012/2012. – has annulled Section 7 of Act CCXI of 2011 on the Protection of Families, which unduly narrowed the term of family.

The above mentioned act defines the family as an emotional and economic community in a system of relations, based on the marriage of a man and a woman, or lineal descendants, or guardianship.

This definition complies with the marriage and family protecting clause of the Constitution (Article L. of the Constitution), however, it only includes a part of the possible and existent family relations. Because it does not follow from Article L. of the Constitution that the relations included in the wider sociological term of family, based on mutual care and permanent emotional and economic community, aiming at the same goal (e.g. like the partners caring about and raising each other’s children, partners not wishing to get children, or  partners of different sexes who cannot have children through other reasons, the widows, persons caring about their sibling or children of their siblings or other kin, or those caring about an elder kin of the ascending line, etc.)  would be excluded from the obligation of the republic on protecting the institution.

Considering, that the family, in a wider sense, is under the protection of the Constitution, the legislator may not enact provisions which narrow the constitutional conception of the family.

Present ruling of the Constitutional Court will have effects in Hungary on the new Civil Code as well as on the subvention system of the families. 


Contact for further information:

Dr. Barbara Gál, Associate

+ 36 1 270 99 00

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Welcome to the BWSP Gobert and Partners legal Blog, where you will be able to read interesting articles of our Partners, Lawyers and Junior Associates. Before we post our first article here is a little background information on our firm:

BWSP Gobert & Partners Attorneys and Tax Advisors was founded in 2002 and started as an affiliate to one of the largest law firms in Hungary and a “big-four” tax and accounting firm in the early 90’s. Being formerly associated with such names as Arthur Andersen, Pinsent Masons and Ernst & Young, today BWSP Gobert & Partners is a completely independent full-service commercial law firm with a well experienced and dynamic team. Currently our firm consists of 3 Partners with altogether more than 40 years’ experience in tax and legal services in various international firms, and a total number of 15 professionals of which five are dealing with tax and ten with legal services. We handle all types of projects – from relatively simple issues to complex and cross-border long term ventures. What makes our services different is in-depth knowledge of Hungarian business and understanding of both tax and legal aspect of our clients’ needs.

Our professionals offer legal support in many languages, such as Hungarian, German, English, Russian, French, Spanish and Italian. The areas of BWSP Gobert & Partners expertise include but are not limited to corporate and commercial law, tax, real estate, M&A, dispute resolution, labor, finance, data protection as well as restructuring, media, property, litigation, IT&IP, insolvency procedures and energy law. We have in-depth knowledge and understanding of cross-border acquisitions in particular.

Many of our clients already are, or aspire to be international and are demanding the same high level of service wherever they operate, and answering this requirement, the quality of our legal and tax counseling is ensured by the high-level professional qualifications of our colleagues. Our team is constantly developing their competences and is being published by reputable sources. We make sure that our clients receive advice from lawyers who are always experts and often leaders in their field.

For more infromation please visit: