I have written here before about Germany’s most exclusive bar, the fourty or so lawyers admitted to the Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof) in civil matters. Every now and then, attempts are being made to reform this part of the German legal system. Mainly, these attempts take the form of challenges in the courts against the way the members of the bar are selected and appointed – thus far, these challenges failed. The current system has been upheld time and again by the Federal Supreme Court and the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht).
When the presidents of the German bar associations (Rechtsanwaltskammern), the self-governing bodies of the German legal profession, met earlier this month, two reform proposals for the Supreme Court bar were on their agenda. A very bold proposal suggested to abolish the exclusivity altogether and to open up representation at the highest court in civil matters to every lawyer. The second one was less revolutionary; it proposed to grant admission to those who qualified in a procedure similar to that for lawyers seeking to qualify as certified specialists (Fachanwalt) for certain areas of the law.
In a recent decision, the Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof) has held that shareholder disputes, and in particular challenges to shareholder resolutions (Beschlußmängelstreitigkeiten) in a limited partnership (Kommanditgesellschaft) are arbitrable in principle. The standards governing the arbitrability of disputes of that nature in the limited liability company (GmbH) apply to partnerships as well. The Federal Supreme Court refers to this decision as “Arbitrability III” (“Schiedsfähigkeit III”), so let’s briefly look at “Arbitrability I” and “Arbitrability II” to put this this decision into context: Continue reading →
Regular readers of this blog will have followed our coverage of the Pechstein case, which, for the time being, came to an end with the June 2016 decision of the Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof), which held that the court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) was a “proper” arbitral tribunal. Continue reading →
Dear readers, thank you for your interest in this blog during the last year! Let me start 2017 by wishing all of you a happy New Year, both professionally and privately. Also, I would like to take the opportunity to look back at 2016. Continue reading →