An opposition to a Greek payment order is the debtor’s principal judicial remedy against an enforceable title issued without a prior hearing on the merits. The deadlines are short, and every ground of opposition must be pleaded from the outset with precision, completeness and reference to the documents in the particular case.

What Is a Greek Payment Order and Why Does It Concern Debtors?

A Greek payment order may be issued for a monetary claim or a claim for delivery of securities where the claim and the amount due are established by a public or private document and the requirements of Articles 623 and 624 of the Greek Code of Civil Procedure are met. The claim must be determined and due and must not depend on an unfulfilled condition, term or counter-performance.

The order becomes an enforceable title once the executory formula has been appended. It must be served on the debtor within two months of issuance; otherwise, it automatically ceases to have effect.

What Changes in Substance under Law 5221/2025?

Who Now Issues a Payment Order?

For applications filed from 1 May 2026, issuance is assigned to a lawyer entered in the special register for the district of the Court of First Instance before which the dispute would fall. The applicant does not select the issuing lawyer. The competent lawyer is appointed by an act of the relevant Bar Association, while allocation follows the order of the register kept under the responsibility of the head of the competent Court of First Instance.

The appointed lawyer examines whether the statutory requirements are satisfied and whether the documents establish the claim. The implementing framework provides for collection of the file within the prescribed period and, as a rule, issuance of the act within twenty days after notice of the assignment. That period is suspended where clarifications or supplementary documents are lawfully requested.

Previous regime	Current regime following the 2025–2026 reforms
The locally competent judge issued the payment order.	For applications filed from 1 May 2026, a lawyer entered in the relevant special register issues the payment order.
The application was determined within the court’s judicial function.	The registers are kept under the responsibility of the head of the competent Court of First Instance, allocation follows their order, and Supervisory Committees oversee compliance.
Subject to res judicata, objections concerning the validity of the order or the claim could, in certain circumstances, also be raised in an opposition under Article 933.	For formal demands to comply served from 1 January 2026, such objections are inadmissible under Article 933 unless they arose subsequently and can no longer be raised through an opposition to the payment order.
Article 633 contained no separate stay mechanism for an opposition following the second service.	New Article 633(2A) states that the opposition does not automatically stay enforcement, but the court may, subject to Article 631 and under the interim-relief procedure, order a stay with or without security until a final decision.

 

Implementation Timeline

The transfer of authority to lawyers was initially scheduled for 1 January 2026 but was deferred for applications filed from 1 May 2026. In the interim, the statutory framework was supplemented by Law 5282/2026 and Ministerial Decision 17255/2026.

Date	Legislative development
28 July 2025	Law 5221/2025 was published in Government Gazette A΄ 133.
1 January 2026	The originally scheduled commencement date, later deferred by Article 114 of Law 5264/2025.
27 February 2026	Law 5282/2026 was published in Government Gazette A΄ 30, making targeted refinements to the new framework, including Articles 626(4) and 632(3).
12 March 2026	Ministerial Decision 17255/2026 was published in Government Gazette B΄ 1359, regulating the special registers, allocation, duties and supervision of appointed lawyers.
Until 30 April 2026	Payment orders continued to be issued by the locally competent judge.
From 1 May 2026	Applications filed from this date are allocated to the appointed lawyers.

 

Opposition to a Payment Order: Deadlines That Remain Unchanged

First Opposition Deadline under Article 632

The period begins upon service and is calculated in working days:

• 15 working days where the debtor is resident or established in Greece;
• 30 working days where the debtor is resident or established abroad or is of unknown residence, subject to the specific requirements of Articles 624 and 631.

The period from 1 to 31 August is excluded when calculating the deadlines under Articles 632(2) and 633(2). The exact date and method of service must be reviewed immediately, because a late opposition is dismissed as inadmissible without examination of its grounds.

Situation	Deadline or legal consequence
Debtor resident or established in Greece	Opposition within 15 working days after service under Article 632(2).
Debtor resident or established abroad, or of unknown residence	Opposition within 30 working days after service under Article 632(2).
Calculation during August	The period from 1 to 31 August is excluded from the deadlines under Articles 632(2) and 633(2).
First deadline expires without an opposition	The creditor may serve the order again. The debtor then has 15 working days after the second service; the opposition may also be filed before that service.
Second deadline also expires	The payment order has res judicata effects and may be challenged only by a petition for retrial.

 

Second Service under Article 633

If no first opposition is filed in time, the creditor may serve the payment order again. The second service triggers a new period of 15 working days. This opposition may also be filed before the second service takes place.

If the second period also expires without an opposition, the payment order has res judicata effects and may thereafter be challenged only by a petition for retrial. Missing the first period does not therefore make the order immediately unchallengeable, but it creates an immediate and serious risk of finalisation.

Which Grounds May Be Raised in the Opposition?

The available grounds depend on the claim, agreement, documents and the manner in which the order was issued and served. They may include:

• insufficient documentary proof of the claim;
• failure to satisfy Articles 623 and 624;
• vagueness or material omissions in the application or order;
• lack of standing or incorrect identification of the debtor;
• payment, discharge, set-off or limitation;
• incorrect calculation of principal, interest, charges or expenses;
• invalidity of the agreement or particular contractual terms;
• unfair standard terms, particularly in consumer, banking or credit agreements;
• defects in issuance, content, timely service or lawful service; and
• inadequate proof of succession to the claim, representation or servicing authority.

Each ground must be pleaded specifically. A general allegation that the order is “unlawful” or the amount “incorrect” is insufficient unless the particular legal and factual defect is identified.

What This Means in Practice for the Debtor

Claims by Banks and Credit Servicers

Where a claim has been transferred or placed under management, the entity entitled to the claim must be distinguished from the credit servicer acting on its behalf. The review may include:

• the chain of transfers or other particular successions;
• documentary proof that the specific claim was included in the transfer;
• lawful representation and the servicer’s authority;
• termination of the underlying agreement and proof that the claim became due;
• calculation of the balance, interest and charges; and
• potentially invalid or unfair contractual terms.

Transfer of a claim or appointment of a servicer is not, by itself, a ground for annulment. The decisive issue is whether the succession, representation and specific claim are lawfully established.

Does the Opposition Stay Enforcement?

As a rule, it does not. Filing an opposition does not automatically stay enforcement. For an opposition under Article 632, the competent court may grant a stay of enforcement, with or without security, under the interim-relief procedure until a final decision is issued on the opposition.

Article 633(2A) expressly provides an equivalent power for an opposition connected with the second service. A stay does not prevent protective measures under Article 724.

As an exception, Article 631 suspends the enforceability of an order issued against a person resident or established abroad, or of unknown residence, for the duration of the opposition period, without preventing the protective measures permitted by law.

Why the Initial Opposition Must Address All Available Grounds

For formal demands to comply served from 1 January 2026, the current Article 933 applies. Where the enforceable title is a payment order, objections concerning its validity or the underlying claim generally cannot be held back and raised for the first time in a later opposition against enforcement if they were already available under Articles 632 and 633.

Subsequently arising objections and arguments based on an independent substantive right require separate assessment. Article 933 remains the remedy for defects in the enforcement procedure itself, but it is not a general second opportunity for grounds that should have been raised against the payment order.

Practical Steps after Service

• Record the precise date, time and method of service immediately.
• Confirm whether the order was served within two months of issuance.
• Collect the payment order, formal demand to comply, certificate of service, agreement, any termination notices, account statements and all related documents.
• Examine all procedural and substantive grounds from the outset.
• Determine whether enforcement has already commenced and whether an urgent stay application is required.
• Do not assume that negotiations suspend the deadline; without a specific statutory consequence, time continues to run.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Who issues payment orders for applications filed from 1 May 2026?

A lawyer entered in the special register. The competent lawyer is appointed by an act of the relevant Bar Association, and allocation follows the order of the register kept under the responsibility of the head of the competent Court of First Instance.

Have the conditions for issuing a payment order changed?

The core substantive conditions in Articles 623 and 624 remain: the claim and amount due must be established in writing, and the claim must be determined and due. The issuing authority and certain procedural rules have changed.

Does an opposition automatically stay enforcement?

Generally, no. A separate stay application is required, subject to the specific exception in Article 631 for the cases governed by that provision.

Is a payment order obtained by a bank or credit servicer automatically invalid?

No. Standing, the chain of transfers, representation, documentary proof of the particular claim and calculation of the amount must be examined. A transfer or servicing arrangement is not, by itself, sufficient for annulment.

I received a payment order before 1 May 2026—which regime applies?

For the identity of the issuing authority, the filing date of the application controls: applications filed up to 30 April 2026 were issued by the competent judge, while applications filed from 1 May 2026 are assigned to an appointed lawyer. Opposition periods run from service, and the specific transitional rules apply to enforcement issues; the relevant dates must therefore be reviewed individually.

Conclusion

Responding to a payment order in Greece requires immediate and comprehensive review of service, the underlying claim, the documentary evidence and any enforcement steps already taken. The short deadline and the need to consolidate all available grounds leave no room for a fragmented response.

This article is intended solely for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Each case requires an individual assessment based on its specific facts and the applicable legal framework. For specialised legal advice, please contact our law firm.