ReleaseWire Connect

GRP Rainer Lawyers and Tax Advisors in Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London – grprainer.com/en conclude: In a recent judgment (Az.: 3 K 1632/12), the Fiscal Court of Rhineland-Palatinate (FC) dealt with the question of the extent of a German limited liability company (GmbH) managing director’s liability in the case of unpaid income tax. In the instant case, no income tax was paid to the tax office for the employees of a GmbH over several months, whereupon the tax office initially attempted to enforce this against the assets of the company. However, this was not possible due to the financial situation with the result that recourse was made to the two managing directors. One of the managing directors subsequently submitted a claim before the FC Rhineland-Palatinate.

GRP Rainer Lawyers Tax Advisors, Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Düsseldorf, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart, Frankfurt http://www.grprainer.com elaborates: The higher regional court in Munich (Az. 23 U 4793/11) decided on March 22nd 2012 that commission determining clauses can be ineffective in view of coexisting and simultaneously completed cooperation agreement and trade-agent contract. According to § 307 para. 1 sentence 2 BGB (Federal code of law) they can be invalid if they are contradictory.

GRP Rainer Lawyers and Tax Advisors in Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London – www.grprainer.com/en conclude: In its judgment dated January 9, 2014 (Az.: 10 U 10/13), the Higher Regional Court of Hamm (HRC) had to address the question of whether a person considered in a will can demand restitution of an asset gifted to a third party by the testator during the latter’s lifetime. In the instant case, a married couple had determined in a joint will that one of their two daughters should be due a semi-detached house after the death of the last surviving spouse. Following the death of the husband, the wife became the sole heiress. However, she thereafter conferred the semi-detached house upon her grandchild after a conflict arose between her and her daughter.

GRP Rainer Lawyers and Tax Advisors in Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London – www.grprainer.com/en conclude: In its judgment of January 17, 2014 (Az.: 332 O 249/12), the Regional Court of Hamburg (RC) clarified that from the submission of incorrect or merely estimated turnover projections follows a pre-contractual breach of duty on the part of the franchisor which entails claims for damages. A franchisee raised an action before the RC Hamburg, pursuant to which the turnover achieved fell far short of the forecasted figures. The defendant franchisor had allegedly failed to point out to the plaintiff during the contractual negotiations that the submitted turnover figures were based only on estimations.

GRP Rainer Lawyers and Tax Advisors in Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London – http://www.grprainer.com/en conclude: This kind of advertising constitutes unfair competition, according to the Higher Regional Court (HRC) of Hamm in its judgment of November 12, 2013 (Az.: 4 U 31/13). The HRC stated that this kind of vouchers would mislead the customer into breaching his contract with his insurer.

GRP Rainer Lawyers and Tax Advisors in Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London – www.grprainer.com/en conclude: The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has established in a ruling (Az.: Rs. C-209/12) the incompatibility of a rule from the German Insurance Contract Act with the life insurances directives of the European Union (EU). The disputed provision provides that the right of clients to withdraw expires one year after the first premium payment. This applies even if the consumer was not properly informed about the possibility of withdrawal in the context of the conclusion of a contract.

GRP Rainer Lawyers and Tax Advisors in Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London - http://www.grprainer.com/en conclude: An employee initially sued for payment of overtime before the Kaiserslautern Labour Court and then before the Mainz Regional Labour Court (LAG) (Az.: 5 Sa 257/13), however both Courts dismissed the claim. The plaintiff, an employed lawyer, argued that he had to work longer than contractually agreed on the cases assigned to him. The employer countered, on the one hand, that it was not aware of the extra work and, on the other hand, that the extra work had not been recognizable.

GRP Rainer Lawyers and Tax Advisors in Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London – http://www.grprainer.com/en conclude: The Infinus Group landed in the headlines at the end of 2013. Following a large-scale raid, various arrests were made. Accusations of fraud hang in the air. Around 25,000 investors are thought to have been cheated out of approx. 400 million euros by means of an elaborate system. A great deal of businesses belonging to the Dresden based Infinus Group subsequently filed for insolvency. Most of them are still involved in preliminary insolvency proceedings.

GRP Rainer Lawyers and Tax Advisors in Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London – http://www.grprainer.com/en conclude: Bad news for investors in ship funds of the issuing house König & Cie. As reported by the “funds telegram”, the companies of the ships MS Stadt Schwerin (Az.: 5 IN 29/14), MS King Julius (Az.: 5 IN 19/14) and MS King Justus (5 IN 30/14) have been placed under insolvency administration.

GRP Rainer Lawyers and Tax Advisors in Cologne, Berlin, Bonn, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Munich, Stuttgart and London – http://www.grprainer.com/en conclude: The Higher Regional Court (OLG) of Stuttgart delivered an opinion in a ruling (Az.: 7 U 95/12) on the burden of proof in cases of inaccurate leaflets. Thus, advice on the part of the advisor is negligent if he makes use of contractual documents or leaflets during the investment consultation and these feature mistakes or information gaps. It is the use and presentation of these inaccurate documents that constitute the advisor’s breach of duty, which can result in damages claims for the investor. According to the Court’s view, the breach of duty is only inapplicable if the advisor informs the clients about the mistakes in the leaflet during the consultation discussion. However, the burden of proof for this purpose lies not with the investor but rather with the advisor.