Update: “Restitution at Any Price” – A Critique of the Hans Sachs Judgment

Last week, I posted on a rather fundamental critique of the Federal Supreme Court in the Hans Sachs Restitution matter published in Frankfurter Allgemeine (FAZ). The article has now been made available in their free online offering. The illustration to the article is not one of the posters from the Hans Sachs Collection, but a work of Greser & Lenz, the FAZ cartoonists from Aschaffenburg, my home town.

 

Share and Enjoy

If you "flattr" Dispute Resolution Germany, your payment will go to amnesty international.

Arbitrator’s Nightmare: When Procedural Orders Backfire – Flex-n-Gate v. GEA

It must be an arbitrator’s nightmare: Imagine a high-stake arbitration that goes on for years, the entire distance, including witness hearings and expert evidence, only for the final award to be set aside on procedural grounds. And this is exactly what the Frankfurt Court of Appeals (Oberlandesgericht) Frankfurt did in a judgment in February 2011, which has now become full and final. For a detailed discussion the case, see my post at the Kluwer Arbitration Blog.

Share and Enjoy

If you "flattr" Dispute Resolution Germany, your payment will go to amnesty international.

“Restitution at Any Price” – A Critique of the Hans Sachs Judgment

In March 2012, the Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof) found in favour of the heir of Jewish art collector Hans Sachs in a restitution case. In my view it created a new precedent for restitution claims for a large class of lost art. The authors of an op-ed piece in today’s Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung agree, and heavily criticize the judgment of the Federal Supreme Court precisely for that reason – they call it “a wrongly decided and dangerous judgment”.

Continue reading

Share and Enjoy

If you "flattr" Dispute Resolution Germany, your payment will go to amnesty international.

CIETAC Administered Arbitrations: Internal Conflicts Cause Uncertainty

Disputes between the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (“CIETAC”) and its sub-commissions in Shanghai (“CIETAC Shanghai”) and Shenzhen (“CIETAC South China”) currently cause significant legal uncertainty. In a post at the Kluwer Arbitration Blog, we discuss this topic, and the legal risks these internal issues at CIETAC create  for parties that have agreed on CIETAC arbitration clauses.

Share and Enjoy

If you "flattr" Dispute Resolution Germany, your payment will go to amnesty international.