Judiciary of Austria

The judiciary is independent of the other two branches of government and is committed to guaranteeing fair trials and equality before the law.

The general courts handle civil and criminal trials as well as non-adversary proceedings such as inheritance cases or legal guardianship matters.

Remand prisons for pre-trial detention or other types of non-correctional custody (Polizeianhaltezentren) belong to the executive branch.

In order to become eligible for appointment to a bench, a prospective judge needs to have a master's degree or equivalent in Austrian law, undergo four years of post-graduate training, and pass an exam.

Criminal defendants accused of political transgressions or of serious crimes with severe penalties have a right to trial by jury.

[20] A successful appeal at law not just overturns but completely erases the verdict of the appellate court, sending the case down the ladder again.

[23] Non-adversary proceedings, debt collection, foreclosure, bankruptcy, and land register matters can also be decided by a judiciary clerk (Rechtspfleger).

[24] There are 18 regional courts (Landesgerichte) in Austria; their seats are in Eisenstadt, Feldkirch, Graz, Innsbruck, Klagenfurt, Korneuburg, Krems an der Donau, Leoben, Linz, Ried im Innkreis, Salzburg, Sankt Pölten, Steyr, Vienna, Wels, and Wiener Neustadt.

Attached to every regional court dealing with criminal trials, there is a branch of the state prosecution service (Staatsanwaltschaft) and a prison (Justizanstalt).

[35] In addition to its adjudicative responsibilities, the court is charged with running the Republic's official public law library (the Zentralbibliothek).

[41] One panel exclusively deals with appeals decisions reached by arbitration tribunals; another panel hears to appeals to antitrust verdicts handed down by the Vienna higher regional court, which has specialist exclusive jurisdiction over all Austrian antitrust cases.

[43] The court maintains a special personnel committee (German: Personalsenat) that provides the minister with a shortlist of three candidates in the event of a vacancy.

[44] In theory, the minister may appoint any Austrian legally qualified to sit the bench and not excluded by the constitution's rudimentary incompatibility provisions.

The terminology used by most modern English-language literature makes the distinction difficult to see; it remains salient in German texts.

The Austrian method of vesting all power to strike legislation in a single specialist court is called the centralized system of judicial review.

[58] Verdicts by administrative trial courts can additionally be challenged on the grounds that they violate the relevant party's constitutional rights in some other way.

This possibility lets the Constitutional Court exercise judicial review not just of ordinances but also of individual-scope actions of the executive branch: A citizen who feels violated in their constitutional rights by an administrative decision or assessment files suit in an administrative court.

[61] In practice, oral argument and true plenary sessions have become rare because workload is heavy and there are broad exceptions to these general rules; most cases today are decided behind closed doors by panels of either nine or five members.

Throughout the 18th and early 19th century, the Habsburgs had tried to rule as absolute monarchs, holding unrestricted power over their subjects with no constraints due to any kind of feudal social compact and with no interference from any of the estates of their various realms.

Under intense pressure, Emperor Ferdinand tried to appease the revolutionaries by enacting the Pillersdorf Constitution, a statute that promised increased civil liberties, a limited form of democratic participation in government, and access to independent courts with the power to review administrative acts and halt administrative overreach.

In modern Austria, the main seat of power (Machtzentrum) is the legislature and the Constitutional Court is the monitoring authority acting as a check on it.

In the philosophical framework of 19th-century Austria, the imperial court was the main seat of power and the legislature was meant to be the monitoring authority.

State attorneys continued to exist but lost most of their responsibilities; they were essentially reduced to their function as public prosecutors, and comparatively powerless ones at that.

Following his defeat in the Austro-Prussian War in 1866, he was forced to give up for good on his desire to remain the sole sovereign and font of law.

Shortly thereafter, the remainder of the empire received the December Constitution, a fourth and final set of fundamental laws that the Emperor would no longer be able to unilaterally scrap.

Judges regained their autonomy and independence, although state attorneys remained limited to their narrow role as prosecutors.

[73] The system of general courts now had the same four rungs it still has today: The December Constitution did more than merely revive suspended institutions, however.

Other parts of the constitution entrenched the rule of law and made it clear that Habsburg subjects would from now on be able to take the State to court should it violate their fundamental rights.

The Slavic peoples of Austria broke away from the German-speaking heartland, all essentially at the same time, and started establishing the nation states they had been demanding for decades.

[53] Because Austria was in fact the first country ever to adopt this system and because it has since spread to Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Belgium, it is also called the "Austrian" or "European" model.