Contingency maxim
The contingency maxim (also the accumulation or concentration principle ) is the name for the civil procedural maxim , according to which all similar means of attack and defense are to be presented in a certain stage of the process. This preclusion rule is intended to accelerate the process and focus on the essentials.
Effects
The contingency maxim means that submissions might have to be formulated more literally and evidence must also be submitted for the subsidiary case. If, for example, a debt of the defendant is disputed in court and a counterclaim exists at the same time, the non-existence of the claim and, if necessary, the offsetting (with submission of the receipts of the counterclaim from the beginning) must be asserted.
Expression
Pure form
In its pure form, the contingency maxim describes that a party participating in a process must use all of their submissions or defenses such as B. should make means of defense within a certain stage of the procedure. According to this principle, procedural acts are limited to certain procedural stages and their subsequent assertion would be inadmissible.
The contingency maxim in its pure form can lead to unfair results, for example if evidence only emerges after the procedural stage in which evidence can be presented (so-called novum ). In the legal system of Germany or Switzerland , the pure contingency maxim therefore only applies selectively, e.g. B. in Germany in legal remedies, in tenancy termination proceedings or in counter or combating actions in enforcement law.
Loosened shape
The relaxed contingency maxim that is frequently encountered also obliges the parties in principle, as does the pure form. Under certain circumstances, however, it allows submissions to be made later.
Legal position
Germany
The German code of civil procedure never follows the pure contingency maxim; Rather, the contradicting principle of unity of the oral hearing applies, from which it basically follows that the parties can submit new motions up to the end of the oral hearing. However, the ZPO also contains provisions that provide for a preclusion. It provides for a rejection of late submissions in Section 296 of the German Code of Civil Procedure .
Switzerland
The Swiss code of civil procedure stipulates that new facts and evidence can only be presented before the main hearing. After that, they will only be taken into account until the conclusion of the exchange of correspondence or the last instruction negotiation, provided that they have only arisen or been found then. In the appeal, the requirements for new facts and evidence are again stricter; in the case of a complaint, they are completely excluded.
If a decision has already become final before new significant facts or evidence emerge, the party concerned is the appeal of revision open.
Individual evidence
- ↑ Art. 229 ZPO. In: Systematic collection of federal laws. Retrieved February 15, 2012 .
- ↑ Art. 317 ZPO. In: Systematic collection of federal laws. Retrieved February 15, 2012 .
- ↑ Art. 326 ZPO. In: Systematic collection of federal laws. Retrieved February 15, 2012 .
- ↑ Art. 328 ff. ZPO. In: Systematic collection of federal laws. Retrieved February 15, 2012 .
