CMS Expert Guide to Digital Litigation in Luxembourg

  1.  Describe the state of digitalisation of the civil justice system in your jurisdiction in general.
  2.  What types of digital or technical measures are currently available in litigation? How frequently do the courts use existing tools and technical capabilities?
  3.  Is the use of these instruments optional or mandatory for the parties and their counsel?
  4.  Do you consider your jurisdiction to have a fully digitalised litigation process in place? If negative, state which elements are lacking for fully digitalised litigation.
  5.  Are there specific rules in place that address the use of technology in litigation? Are such laws currently up for (legislative) debate?
  6.  Are there specific (pilot) projects (either planned or already set up) that aim at further fostering digitalisation in litigation?
  7.  Given the current rise of AI tools, are there specific rules that apply to the use of AI in litigation?
  8.  If digital tools are being used: What are the (technical) measures to prevent unwanted access/IT-security breaches? Are there specific rules in place that relate to the use of data?
  9.  Has the use of digital tools in litigation led to new risks for businesses, e.g. through the rise of legal tech companies collecting (consumer) claims and then jointly or individually filing them on a large scale, using digital and automated processes in this regard?
  10.  Are there specific tools or processes (either planned or already in place) aimed at improving accessibility to legal services (‘access to justice’), e.g. legal chatbots, centralised digital platforms, etc.?

1. Describe the state of digitalisation of the civil justice system in your jurisdiction in general.

The Luxembourg government launched the Paperless Justice project in 2015.

It combines a set of 13 initiatives with the common objective of promoting the dematerialisation of the Luxembourg justice system.

These initiatives inter alia aim to introduce the use of an electronic judicial file within Luxembourg courts, digitalise communication between courts (including magistrates and clerks) and external actors (e.g. counsels, parties, bailiffs and notaries) and dematerialise the filing process for procedural documents and evidence.

The COVID-19 crisis has boosted the use of digital tools – especially the use of emails to replace the holding of certain purely procedural in-person hearings  – leading to some temporary procedural adaptations, which ended in 2021.

The government is now progressively reintroducing these adaptations, including recently in the context of civil and commercial litigation.

2. What types of digital or technical measures are currently available in litigation? How frequently do the courts use existing tools and technical capabilities?

Apart from:

  • the wide use of emails for correspondence between the courts and the counsels (or the parties themselves if they are not represented by a counsel), and
  • the use of audio/video conferencing tools, but only in criminal matters and in specific circumstances,

the litigation process is – as of today – largely undigitalised. 

3. Is the use of these instruments optional or mandatory for the parties and their counsel?

As a general rule, the use of digital/technical measures is not mandatory for the parties and their counsels with the exception of the use of emails by the counsels in their communication with courts, which may sometimes be mandatory. However, it is expected that it will soon be made mandatory in all circumstances.

4. Do you consider your jurisdiction to have a fully digitalised litigation process in place? If negative, state which elements are lacking for fully digitalised litigation.

The litigation process is – as of today – largely undigitalised. The areas where it is most lacking include:

  • The existence of a platform allowing counsels to file their submissions and evidence in an electronic format.
  • The possibility to make certain procedural requests online in order to avoid unnecessary hearings.

However, the government is contemplating these features in the context of the Paperless Justice initiative – see Questions 1 and 6.

5. Are there specific rules in place that address the use of technology in litigation? Are such laws currently up for (legislative) debate?

There are several bills, which purport to address and foster the use of technology. See Question 6.

6. Are there specific (pilot) projects (either planned or already set up) that aim at further fostering digitalisation in litigation?

The most advanced project is currently the dematerialisation of administrative proceedings, which should be implemented as a pilot before the end of 2023.

MyGuichet PRO, the secure one-stop shop for the Luxembourg state’s online services, is expected to serve as the future platform for judicial filings in administrative proceedings.

Similar projects will then progressively be implemented for criminal, civil and commercial proceedings.

7. Given the current rise of AI tools, are there specific rules that apply to the use of AI in litigation?

There are currently no specific rules that apply to the use of AI in litigation. Hence, common rules of procedure apply.

The Minister of Justice, however, uses AI in the context of the anonymisation of published case-law to recognise names of entities and natural persons as well as other sensitive data (e.g. addresses, tax numbers, etc.).

8. If digital tools are being used: What are the (technical) measures to prevent unwanted access/IT-security breaches? Are there specific rules in place that relate to the use of data?

N/A

No.

The two main initiatives relating to the access to justice are:

  • Publications by the Ministry of Justice of various information on substantive law and procedures, and
  • The availability of anonymised and summarised case-law

all via the www.justice.public.lu website.

Portrait ofAntoine Reillier
Antoine Reillier