– How seizure of a bond provided by a third party can still result in taxes – The Federal Court of Justice (BGH, judgement of 22.07.2004, ref. IX ZR 132/03) recognises in constant jurisdiction that deposited penalty bonds and other security payments are attachable by creditors of the debtor. This applies both to the […]
Artikel zum Thema: Federal Court of Justice
Federal Court of Justice (BGH): No protection against access by the insolvency administrator in the case of pension commitments
– Why up to more than 95% of managing partners lose their pension- A new ruling by the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) dated 1 April 2013 (ref. IX ZR 176/76) shows that managing partners and controlling directors often face the complete or predominant loss of their pension as a retirement benefit despite “pledging the […]
Federal Supreme Court facilitates reversal in the case of overpriced junk real estate
– How property buyers can escape over-indebtedness after a bad investment -. Selling overpriced real estate for retirement has been a tradition for decades. For the vast majority of buyers, it was the first and last property in their lives. The idea of calling in an independent expert did not occur to the purchasers […]
How strong claims management becomes a dangerous “service”?
The Federal Court of Justice (BGH, ruling of 07.07.2020, ref. VI ZR 308/19) decided that an employed claims adjuster is (co-)liable in tort if he uses his alleged expertise for an injured party by exerting influence on the performance of third parties; § 823 I BGB. In the case in question, the injured party […]
Does the Federal Agency permit double collection of short-time work benefits (KUG) and full closure insurance (BSV) ?
Short-time work compensation (KUG) is only available as a subsidiary social benefit under the Third Social Security Code. According to legal regulations, benefits or insurance contractual legal claims from a business closure insurance (BSV) are credited, i.e. deducted. This is now said to have changed temporarily by an order of the Federal Institute for Salaried Employees (BA). Really?
Legal restriction to the surrender value in the event of revocation of life insurance policies is contrary to EU law
– Current ECJ ruling opens up reversal with perpetual cancellation right also for new life insurance policies since 2008 – The bang of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) The European Court of Justice ruled (ruling of 19 December 2019, ref. C355/18, C-357/18, C-479/18) that a provision in insurance contract law according to which […]
When revocation and/or amendment of a subscription right can fail
The Federal Court of Justice (BGH, ruling of 25.09.2019, ref. IV ZR 99/18) had to deal with the life insurance of a policyholder (VN) who had fallen into a coma in 1993 after an accident. The wife, who was divorced in 1994, was entitled to withdraw her claim. The father of the UN informed the […]
Employers are often liable to employees for company pension schemes
– What information, education and advisory duties are imposed on employers? – The Regional Labour Court (Landesarbeitsgericht – LAG Hamm, judgement of 06.12.2017, file no. 4 Sa 852/17) decided that the employer (AG) is liable for damages if the advice on deferred compensation in company pension schemes (bAV) was incorrect. This was the case even […]
Federal Supreme Court prohibits insurance consultants from charging contingency fees for changing tariffs in private health insurance
– How the insurance consultant with a second job may do exactly this and more nevertheless – Insurance brokers as well as insurance consultants are allowed to offer policyholders (VN) in private health insurance (PKV) at the change of tariff according to the new tariff. § Section 204 of the German Insurance Contract Act […]
No insurer offers cover for foreseeable burning houses
In its ruling of 4 July 2018, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH, Ref. IV ZR 200/16) ruled „The so-called pre-enforcement clause in § 4 (4) (a) of the German Commercial Code 3 letter a) of the General Conditions for Legal Expenses Insurance (ARB 2008) is not transparent.“, and therefore invalid, § 307 I 2 […]