Interruption (law)
In German procedural law, the interruption is a situation in which the court does not take any further procedural acts. The regulations for the interruption of a procedure are regulated in §§ 239-252 ZPO.
Interruption in the strict sense
The interruption in the narrower sense always takes place by law; an express decision by the trial court is not required. The interruption is regulated in the following cases:
Death of the party
According to § 239 ZPO, the procedure is interrupted if a party dies during the procedure. Unless the claim is a highly personal claim that lapses upon the death of the claimant, the legal successors are not obliged to start proceedings until the party's inheritance has been accepted at the earliest . If this does not happen, the court can summon the legal successors personally at the request of the opponent and continue the proceedings again if they do not appear.
The provisions on the death of the party are to be applied accordingly in accordance with § 242 ZPO in disputes of a previous heir if the succession occurs.
If the lawyer of a party dies in the legal process or if he becomes incapable of litigation, the provisions on the death of the party are to be applied accordingly according to § 244 ZPO.
Opening of bankruptcy proceedings
If the over the party's assets insolvency proceedings opened and the alleged claim relates to the bankruptcy estate , the procedure provided for is § 240 ZPO suspended until the conclusion of the insolvency proceedings. This also applies to estate insolvency proceedings .
Inability to litigate
If the party loses its legal capacity during the ongoing proceedings (e.g. as a result of an accident), if the legal representative of a party incapable of legal proceedings dies or if his power of representation ends, the procedure is interrupted according to § 241 ZPO until a new legal representative has been appointed and this to the Court indicates its power of representation.
According to Section 243 of the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), these provisions are to be applied accordingly if a curator or the execution of a will has been ordered for the estate of a deceased party .
Case of war
Since 1945, the regulation of § 245 ZPO, according to which the procedure is interrupted if the court is no longer functional due to a war or another event, has no longer been of practical relevance . In 2020, the regulation was discussed again in the context of the coronavirus pandemic. Such a pandemic can definitely be a case that is subject to Section 245 ZPO. However, § 245 ZPO regulates the complete cessation of the court's activities due to the event. That does not work if the court remains able to work via home office and emergency operation.
Suspension of proceedings
Unlike an interruption of the proceedings, the suspension does not come into effect by law, but only upon an express decision by the trial court.
Suspension in the case of legal representation
According to § 246 ZPO, regardless of the previous regulations, there is no interruption of the procedure if the party concerned is represented by a lawyer. In these cases, however, the lawyer can apply to the court to suspend the proceedings.
Suspension in the event of war
Similar to the above parallel regulation, the regulation of § 247 ZPO is also of no practical relevance, according to which the court can suspend the proceedings ex officio if a party can no longer communicate with the court due to a war.
Suspension in other cases
The suspension of the proceedings can also be requested from the trial court in other cases in accordance with Section 248 ZPO. The law names five cases in which the proceedings may be suspended, of which the first two are the most important in practice:
- Suspension in the event of prejudice ( § 148 ZPO): If parallel proceedings are pending, the decision of which is preliminary for the outcome of the local proceedings and it is therefore advisable to wait for the outcome of the parallel proceedings, the court can suspend the proceedings until the conclusion of these proceedings.
- Suspension in the event of a suspected criminal offense ( Section 149 ZPO): If it emerges in the legal dispute that a party to the proceedings could have committed a criminal offense and if criminal proceedings are pending with the investigating authorities in this regard, the court can suspend the proceedings until the criminal proceedings are concluded. If a year has passed without a decision in the criminal proceedings, the court can continue the proceedings at the request of one of the parties, unless there are good reasons for a further suspension.
The other three cases mentioned in the law mainly play a role in family law disputes. There are suspension in the event of an application for annulment of the marriage ( Section 152 ZPO), suspension in the event of a pending paternity contestation suit ( Section 153 ZPO) and suspension in the event of a dispute over the existence of a marriage or a parent-child relationship ( Section 154 ZPO).
The court can rule on the question of suspension without an oral hearing. According to § 252 ZPO, an immediate appeal is available against a decision to suspend the proceedings .
The proceedings are suspended
The suspension of the proceedings can be ordered according to § 251 ZPO with the consent of both parties if this makes sense due to ongoing settlement negotiations. However, the suspension of the proceedings also means that the running of civil-law statute of limitations is no longer inhibited and thus claims can expire during proceedings that have been suspended.
As an exception, the court can order the suspension of the proceedings ex officio according to § 251a ZPO if both parties do not appear at the oral hearing and the court does not decide on the basis of the files or postpones the hearing.
Consequences of Suspension and Interruption
According to Section 249 of the German Code of Civil Procedure, suspension and interruption mean that procedural deadlines do not continue to run, but rather begin again after the proceedings have been continued. Litigation by a party during the interruption or suspension of proceedings has no legal effect.
If the interruption or suspension occurs after the oral hearing, but before the judgment is pronounced, the court is not prevented from pronouncing it.
