Back in November 2011, we had covered the judgment of the Frankfurt Court of Appeals (Oberlandesgericht), which held it had jurisdiction to hear actions by German claimants against Standard & Poor’s, New York, in disputes arsing from Lehman ratings. In December 2012, the Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof) confirmed the Frankfurt judgment on the issue of jurisdiction. Read More
Month: January 2013
Update: Russian Arbitrazh Court Not an Arbitral Tribunal
A couple of comments in the LinkedIn International Arbitration and Arbitration Experts groups discussed my post on the Russian Arbitrazh court’s judgment before the Munich Court of Appeals (Oberlandesgericht) – raising, amongst other things, the question what the situation would have been if an application had been made for recognition as a foreign judgment, rather than as an arbitral award, so I thought I briefly address the issue: Read More
European Patent Litigation and Germany’s Role as the Forum of Choice
In today’s Frankfurter Allgemeine, my partner Gisbert Hohagen sets out the new patent landscape in the European Union (Deutschlands führende Rolle in Patentprozessen ist gefährdet – paywalled). He summarizes the changes that the new system of unified patents will bring, and discusses the challenges that the new enforcement regime poses to Germany’s role as the forum of choice for patent litigation – with a market share of 60% of Europe’s patent disputes. Read More
Russian Arbitrazh Court Not an Arbitral Tribunal, Says Munich Court of Appeals
The Munich Court of Appeals (Oberlandesgericht) has held that a Russian Arbitrazh Court (Arbitragegericht, in the German original) is a state court, and not an arbitral tribunal. As a result, the application to the Munich court to recognize and enforce the Arbitrazh court’s judgment as a foreign arbitration award pursuant to Sec. 1061 German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) and the New York Convention was denied. Read More