Supreme Court

General Information about the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is located in the Palace of Justice at Schmerlingplatz 11 in Vienna. Together with the Constitutional Court and the Administrative Court, it is one of Austria’s three highest courts.

As the highest instance of ordinary jurisdiction, the Court rules exclusively in civil and criminal matters. There are no single-judge decisions here. All judgments and decisions are rendered by senates, i.e., panels of several judges.

Access to the Court is strictly regulated by law. Only specific legal remedies are admissible, often subject to the existence of a significant legal question. Decisions of the Supreme Court are final and no longer subject to domestic appeal.

Tasks and Guiding Function

The most important task of the Supreme Court is to ensure the uniformity and reliability of jurisprudence in Austria.

In civil matters, it reviews judgments and decisions of second-instance courts for their legal correctness. In criminal matters, it particularly scrutinizes pleas of nullity against judgments of lay assessors’ and jury courts. This corrects legal errors and protects the rights of those affected.

In legal questions of fundamental importance, the Supreme Court decides in enlarged senates. This resolves differing interpretations and establishes clear guidelines that have significance far beyond the individual case.

For citizens, this means legal certainty; for businesses, reliable framework conditions. The Supreme Court thus acts as a corrective in individual cases and, at the same time, as a driving force for overall legal development in Austria.

Peter Harlander
Harlander & Partner Rechtsanwälte „Der Oberste Gerichtshof schafft Rechtssicherheit für alle, weil er widersprüchliche Auslegungen beseitigt und klare Leitlinien vorgibt.“

Structure and Senates

The Supreme Court never operates with single judges. Every decision is made by a senate, meaning a panel of several judges. This system ensures that judgments are based on collective deliberation and do not depend on a single opinion.

Ordinary Senates

The standard are the so-called ordinary senates. They consist of five professional judges: a presiding judge and four other members. Most proceedings are decided in this composition, both in civil and criminal matters. Deliberation and voting take place jointly, with each vote carrying equal weight.

Three-Judge Senates

In addition, there are three-judge senates, which consist of only three professional judges. They are responsible for specific, mostly procedural legal questions – for example, in fundamental rights complaints in criminal proceedings. Furthermore, three-judge senates can be deployed for more formal or preparatory decisions. However, should a senate member believe that the case is too important, it can be requested at any time that the matter be brought before the full five-judge senate.

Enlarged Senates

In particularly significant cases, the Supreme Court convenes in an enlarged composition with eleven members. It convenes such a senate when a legal question of fundamental importance needs to be clarified. This applies particularly when it intends to change existing jurisprudence or when different decisions have previously been rendered on a question. The judgments of enlarged senates are particularly groundbreaking and set the course for many years.

Involvement of Lay Judges

In some areas, lay judges, who contribute specialized expertise, also participate alongside professional judges. For example, in labor and social law matters, representatives of employers and employees decide jointly with professional judges. In cartel law, economic experts are involved. In this way, practical experience from the world of work and business also flows into the highest court’s jurisprudence.

Number and Jurisdictions

The Supreme Court is divided into 18 senates. This division makes it possible to manage the large number of proceedings efficiently while ensuring specialization.

• Eleven Senates for Civil Matters
  They deal with questions from the entire field of civil law, such as contracts, damages, family and inheritance law, or corporate law. One of these senates is additionally responsible for arbitration proceedings and reviews decisions of private arbitration tribunals.
• Five Senates for Criminal Matters
  They are responsible for pleas of nullity, fundamental rights complaints, and other legal remedies in criminal proceedings. In this composition, the Court oversees the correct application of criminal law and the protection of fundamental rights.
• One Senate as the Supreme Cartel Court
  It reviews decisions of the Vienna Higher Regional Court in cartel matters. This involves competition and market protection, i.e., issues affecting the entire economy.
• One Senate for the Review of Arbitral Awards
  This senate decides on the annulment of arbitral awards or on the impartiality of arbitrators. This ensures that private arbitration is also subject to legal control.

The so-called distribution of business regulates annually which judges serve in which senate. It determines which senates are responsible for specific types of proceedings and how individual legal cases are distributed within the Court. This system creates transparency and predictability because it is clear from the outset which senate will handle which case. Thus, the Court assigns each legal matter to a precisely determined panel and prevents randomness or arbitrary decisions regarding jurisdiction.

Appeals before the Supreme Court in Civil Matters

Revision

The Revision is directed against judgments of the second instance. The Supreme Court exclusively examines legal questions and procedural errors. Findings of fact and assessment of evidence remain untouched. The Revision is admissible if a significant legal question exists or if the second instance allows it. Value-in-dispute limits and subject matter exclusions deliberately restrict access. If the Revision is not admitted, the extraordinary Revision often remains, with a strict burden of justification.

Revision Appeal

The Revision Appeal challenges decisions/orders of the second instance in matters typically concerning non-contentious proceedings (e.g., probate, guardianship, land registry). In terms of content, it corresponds to the Revision in matters of decisions/orders. Here too, the following applies: significant legal question, strict form, no factual instance.

Appeal to the Supreme Court

An appeal to the Supreme Court is provided against certain appellate court decisions/orders. The law narrowly defines these cases, for example, in enforcement or land registry matters. The Supreme Court remains a legal instance; new facts are excluded.

Arbitration Law

In narrowly defined cases, the Supreme Court decides at first and last instance in arbitration matters, for example, concerning the annulment of arbitral awards or questions of arbitrator bias. This control protects the integrity of arbitration without undermining its autonomy.

Practical Note: Without a clearly elaborated significant legal question, access fails. Admissibility is the first hurdle and fails more often than the case itself.

Appeals before the Supreme Court in Criminal Matters

Plea of Nullity

The plea of nullity is the core legal remedy against judgments of lay assessors’ and jury courts. It alleges legal and procedural errors. The Supreme Court controls the application of laws and procedures, but not the free assessment of evidence. If it grants the complaint, it annuls the judgment and remits or decides the matter, depending on the type of error.

Combined Appeal

The Supreme Court decides on the appeal against the sentence when it hears the plea of nullity in a public hearing. If it rejects the plea of nullity, the Higher Regional Court generally decides on the appeal.

Plea of Nullity for the Preservation of Law

This special legal remedy is brought by the Public Prosecutor General’s Office to ascertain legal violations and ensure the uniformity of the legal order. Its primary purpose is legal clarity, not the favoring of individual cases.

Fundamental Rights Complaint

Legal remedy for the protection of personal liberty, especially in cases of pre-trial detention. The Supreme Court, in a three-judge panel, reviews whether the detention decision was lawful or if a release was delayed. Measures involving significant intervention require strict control.

Reopening of Criminal Proceedings

The reopening corrects miscarriages of justice within narrow limits, for example, in cases of new evidence or serious procedural violations. If the Supreme Court grants it, the case is re-heard.

Practical Note: In criminal matters, precision in grounds for nullity is crucial. Vague complaints are ineffective.

The Supreme Court as the Supreme Cartel Court

Against decisions of the Vienna Higher Regional Court acting as the Cartel Court, the Supreme Court decides as the Supreme Cartel Court. The involvement of lay judges brings in economic expertise. Decisions shape competitive and market behavior throughout Austria.

Concise Procedural Overviews

Civil Proceedings at the Apex

1. Judgment or decision of the second instance is available.
2. Submit pleading with grounds for admissibility and significant legal question within the deadline.
3. Supreme Court examines admissibility and legal question.
4. Decision predominantly in writing; oral hearing is an exception.
5. In case of divergences or intent to deviate, the enlarged senate decides.

Criminal Proceedings at the Apex

1. Judgment of a lay assessors’ or jury court.
2. Plea of nullity (possibly combined with an appeal).
3. Opinion of the Public Prosecutor General’s Office.
4. Decision in a non-public session or public hearing.
5. Annulment, referral, or decision on the merits, depending on the outcome.

Significance for Citizens and Businesses

The Supreme Court shapes not only the law for legal professionals but also the daily lives of citizens and businesses. It corrects legal errors of lower instances and protects fundamental rights. Private individuals thus gain reliability: In family law, inheritance law, or consumer protection, the Supreme Court decides disputes according to uniform standards and protects against arbitrary judgments.

At the same time, the Court creates stability for the economy. Businesses trust that central questions of contract law, labor law, and competition law are judged according to clear and predictable criteria. Uniform guiding decisions prevent contradictory judgments and ensure planning certainty for investments and personnel decisions.

By creating binding guidance for all, the Supreme Court strengthens trust in the Austrian judiciary. Citizens receive protection and clarity in personal matters, while businesses benefit from reliable framework conditions for their economic activities. Thus, the Supreme Court significantly contributes to maintaining legal certainty and trust in the legal system.

Common Errors in Supreme Court Proceedings

A proceeding before the Supreme Court is not a new trial, but a legal review. Precisely for this reason, errors frequently occur in practice that lead to the legal remedy not being heard at all. The most important pitfalls are:

• Unclear Justification of the Legal Question
  The Supreme Court only examines legal questions of fundamental importance. If it is not clearly explained why a specific question is important for legal certainty or the uniformity of jurisprudence, the legal remedy will be rejected.
• Mixing of Facts and Law
  Before the Supreme Court, it is no longer about whether a witness was credible or whether evidence was correctly assessed. Such factual questions are definitively decided. Anyone attempting to reintroduce them misses the scope of review.
• Overlooked Limits
  Some cases may not be brought before the Supreme Court by law, for example, if the value in dispute is too low or if the law explicitly excludes certain matters. Those who disregard these limits lose time and incur costs.
• Formal and Deadline Errors
  Legal remedies must be submitted within strict deadlines and in a clearly prescribed form. Even a small formal error or a belated pleading will result in the proceeding not being heard.

Conclusion: Anyone wishing to appeal to the Supreme Court must clearly elaborate the decisive legal question, justify its significance for the legal system, and adhere to strict formal requirements. Only then is there a realistic chance that the highest court will address the merits of the case.

Behind-the-Scenes Organization

For the Supreme Court to reliably fulfill its duties, it is supported by several institutions. These work behind the scenes and ensure that judicial activity rests on a stable foundation.

An important component is the Scientific Service, often also called the Evidence Office. Here, the Court’s decisions are collected, systematically processed, and made accessible in a central database. This ensures that jurisprudence remains traceable and that future proceedings also rest on a uniform foundation.

This is complemented by the Central Library in the Palace of Justice, which offers an extensive collection of legal literature. It provides judges with the necessary scientific basis for their decisions.

Finally, the Registry handles the practical administration of court operations. Submissions are received, files are registered, and deliveries are organized there. Without these administrative structures, the continuous work of the Supreme Court would not be possible.

Your Advantages with our Support

Before the Supreme Court, legal representation is mandatory. Every revision, every appeal, and every plea of nullity must be prepared and submitted by a lawyer. Therefore, what is decisive is not whether one is legally represented, but how well the representation is specialized in proceedings before the highest court.

Our representation offers three key advantages:

• Precision in Legal Questions
  Before the Supreme Court, decisions are made exclusively on legal questions. Only those who clearly elaborate the significant legal question and provide a legally sound justification will succeed.
• Confident Navigation Through Formalities
  Pleadings to the Supreme Court are subject to strict formal and deadline requirements. Even small errors lead to rejection. Experienced Supreme Court lawyers know these hurdles and avoid costly formal errors.
• Realistic Assessment of Success
  Not every proceeding is open before the Supreme Court. Our competent legal representation clarifies in advance whether a legal remedy is admissible at all and objectively assesses the chances of success. This prevents unnecessary costs and false expectations.