May 31 Hearing Set in Case Filed by Egyptian Center to Annul Cairo Court of Appeals’ Decision to Raise Fees for Automated Judicial Services

The First Circuit of the Administrative Court at the State Council has scheduled a hearing for May 31, 2025, to consider the lawsuit filed by the Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights, seeking to annul the decision issued by the President of the Cairo Court of Appeals to increase the fees charged for services provided by the court.

In its petition—filed on April 10, 2025, by attorneys Malek Adly, Khaled El-Gamal, Samah Samir, and Wael Ghali—the Center stated that it was surprised by the issuance of the contested decision, which raised the fees for 33 judicial services offered by the Cairo Court of Appeals. The decision effectively imposes new, additional, and mandatory charges on all court filings, including statements of claim upon registration, motions to renew struck-off cases, requests to expedite stayed cases, renewals from cassation, applications to correct the form of an appeal, joinder of parties, review of document files, all notifications and re-notifications, and the issuance of certified copies of judgments and expert reports, among other procedural services specified in the decision.

The appeal argues that these fees were imposed without legal basis. It asserts that the decision mandates the payment of these charges as a precondition for registering and submitting appeal statements, proceeding with related court actions, and obtaining certified or enforceable copies of judgments. The Center contends that such a requirement constitutes an infringement on the constitutional right to access to justice, in violation of Article 68 of the Egyptian Constitution. Furthermore, the Judicial Authority Law No. 46 of 1972 contains no provision authorizing the President of the Court of Appeals to impose such fees.

The petitioners emphasized that judicial fees are intended as a contribution by litigants toward the cost of operating the judiciary, and that such fees must be levied through constitutionally mandated legislative means. They referenced a binding legal principle affirmed by the Supreme Administrative Court’s Principles Unification Chamber, holding that court fees must be imposed by legislation. As such, the impugned decision violates the law and imposes an unjust financial burden on litigants.

Additionally, the appeal maintains that the decision is contrary to established legal provisions and should therefore be deemed legally null and void. The Center cited prior rulings confirming this position, including a judgment by the Supreme Administrative Court on January 12, 1991 (Case No. 2748 of Judicial Year 32), and another by the Alexandria Administrative Court on January 30, 1997 (Case No. 991 of Judicial Year 50).

The Center further argued that the constitutional framework guarantees the right to litigation for all, and that the pursuit of justice among litigants lies at the heart of the judiciary’s mission. The imposition of additional fees, the Center maintains, constitutes an undue restriction on the right to litigate and contravenes constitutional protections.

The Center requested that the case be admitted procedurally, and that the court, on an urgent basis, suspend the implementation of the decision issued by the President of the Cairo Court of Appeals increasing the fees for judicial services, together with all resulting legal effects—foremost among them, halting the enforcement of the decision. It also requested that the judgment be executed in its draft form without prior notification, and that the respondents be ordered to bear the costs of the urgent proceedings.

Substantively, the Center seeks a ruling annulling the contested decision and all consequential effects, obliging the respondents to pay the legal costs and attorneys’ fees, with immediate enforcement of the ruling in its draft form.

It is worth noting that the Cairo Court of Appeals and its branches had decided to increase the fees for automated court services as of March 2025, despite a prior judgment nullifying a decision that imposed additional fees for issuing and receiving judgments and certificates at the Mansoura Family Prosecution Office. This has raised questions regarding the legality of imposing such fees on automated services across Egyptian courts.

Notably, attorneys from the Center and others had previously secured a final ruling from the Supreme Administrative Court annulling a decision by the Director of the Prosecution Office at the Mansoura Family Prosecution to impose additional fees, finding the decision unlawful and a burden on litigants.