# Baumbach's formula

The Baumbach'sche formula is a term from the law . It is named after Adolf Baumbach , a commentator on the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO).

In German civil proceedings , the court has to decide in the judgment who bears the costs of the legal dispute ( Section 308 (2) ZPO) without the need for a party to apply. Baumbach's formula is used here in the decision-making in cases in which several comrades-in- arms are suing or suing and prevailing to varying degrees. The division of court costs and extrajudicial costs (legal fees) between the parties is decided separately. Baumbach's proposal for a decision (in his commentary on § 100 ZPO) does not represent a mathematical formula, but rather formulates the decision to be made by the court for a simple case in which the plaintiff sues two members of the dispute in the same amount and wins against one, against the other loses. However, especially in more difficult cases, the solution can be found with the help of mathematical formulas, such as those used in calculation programs on the PC.

## Simple case of the cost decision (without Baumbach's formula)

In principle, the ZPO is based on the "unity of cost decisions ". This means, among other things, that the court costs and the extrajudicial costs (legal fees) are distributed at the same rate.

Example: A sues B against € 10,000. The court decides that A is only entitled to € 2,500.

According to Section 92 (1) of the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), the costs of partial deficiencies are generally to be divided proportionally. The quota that a party has to bear results from the amount of its defeat divided by the amount in dispute . In the example, the court costs and the extrajudicial costs would have to be borne uniformly to 3/4 of A and 1/4 of B.

## Use case for Baumbach's formula

An exception is made to the principle of the unity of the cost decision in the case of parties in dispute if they are sued in different proportions and / or the court sentenced them in different proportions.

It is advisable to prepare tables (see graphics) for the calculation of the respective cost-bearing ratios.

Example: A is suing B € 8,000 in a lawsuit and € 10,000 against C. The court awards A against B € 2,000 and against C € 4,000.

The court costs would be calculated in this process uniform for a (fictitious) in dispute of € 18,000 (addition of the application against B and C).

A is inferior with € 6,000 against B and with € 6,000 against C for a total of € 12,000. B is inferior with € 2,000 and C with € 4,000. This means that A has to pay 12/18 or reduced 2/3 of the court costs, B has to pay 2/18 or reduced 1/9 and C has to pay 4/18 or 2/9.

Distribution of court costs according to Baumbach's formula
Participant Subject share Expense ratio
A. € 12,000 12,000 / 18,000
B. € 2,000 2,000 / 18,000
C. € 4,000 4,000 / 18,000
total € 18,000 1 (= 100%)

The extrajudicial costs of A would be distributed in the same proportion, since he was involved in both procedural relationships .

The extrajudicial costs of B and C only arose according to the value in dispute in their legal relationship (i.e. for B after € 8,000 and for C after € 10,000). A quota can only be formed on the basis of these values.

In the relationship between A and B, which amounted to a total of € 8,000, A was inferior by € 6,000, so he has to pay 6/8 or 3/4 of B's ​​extrajudicial costs. B was inferior by € 2000, so he has to pay 2/8 or reduced 1/4 of his extrajudicial costs himself. C has nothing to do with these costs.

The relationship between A and C was about 10,000 €. A lost € 6,000; So he has to pay 6/10 or, in short, 3/5 of the extrajudicial costs of C, C has to pay 2/5 himself. B has nothing to do with these costs.

The court's decision on costs would be based on Baumbach's formula:

“The plaintiff has to bear 2/3 of the court costs and the extrajudicial costs of the plaintiff, the defendant 1) 1/9 and the defendant 2) 2/9. The plaintiff has to bear 3/4 of the extrajudicial costs of the defendant 1), of those of the defendant 2) 3/5, otherwise the parties have to bear their extrajudicial costs themselves. "