The litigation as plaintiff representative or defendant representative is our passion. Therefore, we process legal proceedings of all kinds and offer litigation and appointments before courts in Lower Saxony, Bremen and Hamburg.
If you, as a lawyer in Lower Saxony, Hamburg or Bremen, have to take court appointments, but do not want to take care of those appointments, we are available to you on a case-by-case basis and with our expertise from our extensive and versatile forensic practice:
- timely examination and confirmation of the assumption of the mandate
- careful familiarization with the facts after sending a hand file / insight into the web file
- objective and professional professional perception of the court date for your client in sub-authorization according to your specifications (including, if applicable, restraint in comparative statements / actual verbal pleading to the cause and if necessary, opinion on the legal situation in the appointment, etc.)
- Submission of the appointment report by fax or e-mail following the appointment, at the latest the following day
- Fee sharing if necessary, excluding the separately incurred by the Unterbevollmächtigung fees (ie your client will incur no additional attorney fees)
The representations we take on the following courts
- Hanover (all courts, Appointment before Hanover district court, Hanover district court, Hanover labor court, Hanover regional labor court, Hanover administrative court, Hanover social court, Lower Saxony tax court)
- Brunswick (all courts, appointments before the district court Braunschweig, Regional Court Braunschweig, Labor Court Braunschweig, Higher Regional Court Braunschweig, Administrative Court of Braunschweig)
- Hildesheim (all courts, in particular appointments before the district court Hildesheim, District Court Hildesheim)
- Celle (all courts, in particular appointment representation before the district court Celle, Landessozialgericht Niedersachsen, Higher Regional Court Celle)
- Hamburg (all courts, in particular district court Hamburg and Higher Regional Court Hamburg)
- Bremen (all courts, in particular district court Bremen and Higher Regional Court Bremen)
- Göttingen (all courts, in particular appointment representation before the district court Göttingen, district court Göttingen)
In principle, the right to information under § 242 BGB can not be time-barred before the main claim for which it serves.
BGH JUDGMENT VI ZR 222 / 16 of 25. July 2017
BGB §§ 195, 242 Be, 372, 812; HintG NRW §§ 4, 22 para. 3
The VI. Civil Senate of the Federal Court has to the hearing of the 20. June 2017 by the chairman judge Galke, the judge open hole, the judges Dr. Oehler and dr. Roloff and the judge Small
recognized for right:
On the appeal of the plaintiff is the judgment of the 6. Civil Chamber of the Landgericht Köln of the 12. May 2016 canceled. The case is remanded to the court of appeal for a new trial and decision, including the costs of the appeal.
An entitlement to information access to the official telephone numbers of the employees of Job Centers can both the threat to the functioning of the authority as well as the protection of personal data to oppose the employees. The Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig has decided today.
The plaintiffs, citing the Freedom of Information Act, seek access to service telephone lists of the defendant Job Centers in Cologne, Nuremberg City, Berlin Mitte and Berlin Treptow-Köpenick. The employees of these job centers are not directly reachable by their customers by telephone. Calls are answered in each case by specially set up service centers with uniform telephone numbers.
Insofar as the claims asserted by the plaintiffs were still in dispute, the actions in the appeal instance had no success. The revisions directed against this have been rejected by the Federal Administrative Court.
§ 128 Principle of Orality; written procedure
§ 78 ZPO Anwaltsprozess
(4) A lawyer who is entitled to be represented in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 may represent himself.
Factual and local jurisdiction rules to guarantee the statutory judge
In principle, to ensure that the legal judge avoids manipulation by either party or both and to ensure the proper distribution of the business transaction, the law prescribes exactly which court of first instance the plaintiff must call.
a) Competent jurisdiction
The substantive jurisdiction is whether the district court or district court has jurisdiction as the court of first instance. The regulation can again be found in the GVG. According to § 23 GVG, the District Court is, among other things, responsible for disputes over property and non-pecuniary claims with a value in dispute up to 5.000 Euro and regardless of the amount in dispute arising from leases concerning living space and old parts. Among other things, the district court is responsible for all actions that go beyond 5.000 Euro (see § 71 GVG). The calculation of the value in dispute for jurisdiction can now be found again in §§ 1 ff. ZPO. If the non-competent court is called, the action should be dismissed as inadmissible. However, the court must inform the parties beforehand. In that case, the plaintiff has the option of applying for a referral. This can also be done in the alternative. For such applications there is no lawyer at the district court. The court then refers to the competent court (§ 281 ZPO). This reference is binding. The court decides on the costs to which reference was made.
Unless an exclusive jurisdiction exists, the parties may, by way of choice of court agreement, call a non-independent court. The defendant can also get involved rügelos. Before the district court, however, he must be informed by the court of jurisdiction (§ 504 ZPO).
Judgments of the district court and the district court can in principle be attacked with the appeal. The next higher court then reviews the verdict. However, the appeal is only admissible if you have been defeated in the amount of at least 600 Euro or the court that has decided in the first instance, the appeal in the verdict expressly permits.
Attention: If it is a so-called first default judgment, then an appeal is not allowed. Instead, you can appeal against it within two weeks. About the objection decides the hitherto competent court itself.
The appeal against judgments of the district court is addressed to the district court - except in decisions of the Family Court: There is always the Higher Regional Court jurisdiction. Judgments of the district court are examined by the higher regional court.
Associate attorney is in the remuneration determination procedure according to §§ 45 ff. RVG no claim against the state treasury for refund of VAT
The adjunct lawyer is in the remuneration determination procedure according to §§ 45 ff. RVG no claim against the state treasury Reimbursement of VAT, provided by him entitled party to deduct input tax is.
Here you come to 3 decisions
On application by the bankruptcy court of the 20.4.05 bankruptcy proceedings on the assets of the debtor were opened.
Bankruptcy proceedings: Responsibility for domiciled insolvency debtors
If insolvency proceedings have already been opened against the debtor's assets, further applications for the opening of the proceedings concerning the assets already insolvency (§ 35 InsO) are inadmissible.
The assignment of life insurance claims for death to a bank also includes the surrender value.
A claim of a creditor already falls into the insolvency estate, if it originated before opening. It is not necessary for the claim to be enforceable before the opening of the proceeding. 2) A claim for intentionally unauthorized acts also participates in the insolvency proceedings.
An insolvency administrator does not lose his right to remuneration in insolvency proceedings in which he has committed no breach of duty because he has committed embezzlement in other insolvency proceedings.
Assets with rights of separation and segregation are only to be added to the assets according to § 1 I 4 InsVV if the provisional administrator has dealt with them to a considerable extent. Only significant activities in relation to the debited assets are to be considered with surcharge.
Insolvency administrator fee: For the amount of the "continuation of operations" and "business transfer
Depending on the circumstances, an increase of the remuneration in terms of "going concern" with 17% and "transfer of business" with 10% may be appropriate.