Armenian legal framework has experienced different changes lately and as of now contains four levels:
To start with case courts
Courts of Appeal
Court of Cassation
The principal level is spoken to by two sorts of courts: courts of general locale and the Administrative Court. The last has purview principally over cases including open specialists, including assessment and traditions administrations, regardless of whether they go about as respondents or offended parties.
Cases not subject to the extraordinary managerial purview, including common and criminal cases, are attempted by the courts of general ward, independent of the sum included.
The second level comprises of three transitional level redrafting courts: the Civil Court of Appeals, the Criminal Court of Appeals and the Administrative Court of Appeals. The previous two mediate interests against choices of the courts of general ward in common and criminal cases separately, while the last hears bids brought against choices of the Administrative Court
The Court of Cassation is the fundamental court of final resort, which hears advances for cassation against choices of every one of the three courts of bid and is in charge of guaranteeing the uniform elucidation and execution of law by expressing lawfully restricting points of reference. It inspects just matters of law and does not attempt truths.
The Constitutional Court is particularly accused of sacred survey and can announce instantly ineffectual demonstrations of Parliament in the event that they are not good with the Constitution. A protected interest can be brought simply after all different cures are depleted and just if infringement of established rights are charged.
Judges utilize three procedural codes: the code of common methodology, the code of criminal strategy and the code of authoritative system. Cases are mediated by one judge in the primary example courts, by three judges in the courts of advance and by no less than six judges in the Court of Cassation. There are nine seats on the Constitutional Court.
There are no jury trials in Armenia, and truths are attempted by expert judges. Procedures are ill-disposed in nature, and the privilege to round of questioning is ensured. However judges are entitled, and here and there required, to demonstration of their own movement keeping in mind the end goal to build up reality. Procedures are directed in Armenian dialect and, with a few exemptions, are interested in broad daylight.
Understandings of law by the Court of Cassation are legitimately official upon lower courts. Suppositions and discoveries of lower courts are not authoritative but rather should be considered as convincing specialist.
Arrangements on option question determination are basically contained in the Law on Commercial Arbitration in view of the UNCITRAL Model-Law and the Law on Financial System Mediator gone for insurance of customers of money related administrations.
Nerses Isajanyan is a rehearsing lawyer in Armenia represent considerable authority in national and global business, value-based matters and tax assessment. He contemplated law at Georgetown University, the Fletcher School and University Lyon