As the year comes to an end, I looked back at what posts were most popular in 2012. The top post was on Oracle v. Usedsoft, an ECJ landmark case on used software, and hence arguably somewhat “off topic” for this blog.
Litigation proper occupies the second, forth, sixth and tenth place, with posts on Third Party Litigation Funding: Movement in the German Marketplace, International Litigation and Arbitration Trends: A Survey of Surveys, a look at Germany’s Supreme Court Bar, and, finally, securities litigation: Frankfurt Courts Limit Scope of New Bond Act.
Investment arbitration features in third, fifth and seventh place, with Frankfurt Court of Appeals Upholds Arbitration Clause in BIT Arbitration: Eureko v. Slovak Republic, Transparency in Investment Treaty Arbitration and Atomic Arbitration on Vattenfall’s action against Germany.
Mediation features twice, with no. 8, German Mediation Act – Final Compromise and no. 9, How Lawyers Affect Mediation.
The photo shows Schönbusch Castle, Aschaffenburg.
Litigation funding is a topic I have covered from different angles here on Dispute Resolution Germany. As I noted, there is virtually no regulation of third party funding in this country, nor are there civil law equivalents to the common law doctrines champerty and maintenance. So it is interesting to watch, as an interested by-stander, how things develop in England and the United States. Apparently, there are calls for regulation in these jurisdictions that are, rightly or wrongly, percieved by many as more liberal and less regulated than Germany. Continue reading →
In an earlier post, I had written about a judgment of the District Court (Landgericht) Cologne that had held the Lempertz auction house liable in relation to the sale of a Campendonk painting forged by Wolfgang Beltracchi. The court ordered Lempertz to hold the buyer harmless for the purchase price in the order of EUR 2.9 Million. Continue reading →