From a distance but also up close

Sometimes the outcome of court proceedings may affect the legal situation of an entity that is not formally participating in them. However, such an entity does not have to remain passive – it may join the case as a third-party intervener (Article 76 of the Code of Civil Procedure) if it has a legal interest in a decision being made in favor of one of the parties. A legal interest exists when the ruling directly or indirectly affects the rights and obligations of the intervener.

There are two types of third-party intervention: independent and dependent. In the case of independent third-party intervention, the ruling directly shapes the legal situation of the intervener, who acts in defense of their own rights and not just to support a party. According to Article 81 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the provisions concerning uniform joint participation apply accordingly to independent third-party interveners. This is particularly important in situations where the ruling issued in the case has a direct legal effect on the relationship between the intervener and the opposing party of the party the intervener has joined. A practical example of such a situation may be the issue of litigation costs – an independent third-party intervener is treated as a uniform co-litigant, which means the rulings cover both the main party and the intervener.

In the case of a dependent third-party intervener, the intervener acts more as an assistant to a party. The outcome of the case has only an indirect effect on the interests, rights, and obligations of such an intervener. Therefore, for example, under Article 107 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a dependent intervener is not obliged to reimburse litigation costs to the opponent of the party they supported.

Third-party intervention can be submitted at any stage of the proceedings – until the close of the hearing in the second instance. The intervener has the right to submit evidence motions, present arguments, and even file appeals. The actions of the intervener, however, must not be contrary to the interests of the party they have joined. It is also worth distinguishing third-party intervention from impleader, which is initiated by one of the parties to the proceedings, whereas intervention is a voluntary act by an entity that is not a party.

Third-party intervention is an alternative to bringing an action. It does not interrupt the limitation period, as it is not a direct procedural act in the case. In any situation, it is worth considering with a lawyer the appropriate course of action – whether to engage directly in the proceedings or participate with some distance.