XI. Civil Senate of the Federal Court of Justice

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The XI. The civil senate is a panel of the Federal Court of Justice . It is the eleventh of a total of thirteen Senates currently dealing with civil matters.

He is mainly responsible for banking, stock exchange and securities law, loan law and surety law. This is why it is also known as the Bank Senate .

occupation

The Senate is currently composed as follows:

Jan Tolkmitt is from the XI. Civil Senate resigned and the newly created XIII. Civil Senate has been assigned. When his appointment as judge at the Federal Court of Justice takes effect, Judge at the Higher Regional Court Dr. Shield from Spannenberg to the XI. Civil Senate.

Chairperson

No. Name (life data) Beginning of the term of office Term expires
1 Herbert Schimansky (* 1934) 4th July 1988 June 30, 1999
2 Gerd Nobbe (1944-2019) July 12, 1999 January 31, 2009
3 Ulrich Wiechers (* 1949) February 12, 2009 October 31, 2014
4th Jürgen Ellenberger (* 1960) February 27, 2015

Jurisdiction

According to the BGH's business distribution plan (as of 2018), the XI. Civil Senate responsible for:

  1. the litigation over
    1. Claims from the purchase and exchange of securities ,
    2. Claims from possession and ownership (including the cases of Section 771 ZPO), usufruct and right of lien (including the commercial right of retention, Section 369 HGB) to securities as well as from legal transactions relating thereto,
    3. Claims based on the Stock Exchange Act and the Depot Act as well as prospectus liability claims under Section 127 Investment Act, Section 13, 13a of the Securities Sales Prospectus Act, Section 21, 22, 24 Securities Prospectus Act, Section 20, 21, 22 Asset Investment Act and Section 306 Capital Investment Code as well claims under capital market law insofar as they are based on banking or stock exchange law,
    4. Bills of exchange , check items and claims from commercial instructions ;
  2. the litigation
    1. on contractual relationships (§§ 662 - 676c BGB) and management without engagement (§§ 677 - 687 BGB) of the banks ,
    2. on claims from bank guarantees;
    3. in accordance with Sections 50, 51 of the Act on the Comparability of Payment Account Fees, switching payment accounts and access to payment accounts with basic functions (Payment Accounts Act) in which banks are involved;
  3. the legal disputes about loan agreements between a credit institute and a borrower as well as between an entrepreneur as the lender and a consumer as the borrower (§§ 491 ff, 13, 14, 607 ff BGB, §§ 1 ff VerbrKrG), from the deposit business of a credit institution (loan from Customers as lenders), claims from current accounts (§ 355 HGB) as well as legal disputes about abstract obligations (§§ 780 - 808 BGB) including those about bonds within the meaning of the Debt Securities Act, unless the insolvency court is competent; however, in the case of legal disputes about claims from abstract contractual obligations, the underlying claim is decisive for jurisdiction if it is the subject of the dispute;
  4. the legal disputes over claims from possession and ownership of movable property, insofar as property has been transferred as security in connection with loan agreements ;
  5. the legal disputes over guarantees (§§ 765 ff BGB); however, in the case of legal disputes about a guarantee, the main liability is decisive for jurisdiction, if only its existence forms the subject of the dispute.
  6. the legal disputes assigned to the Federal Court of Justice in accordance with § 16 sentences 2 and 3 FMStFG, insofar as they are legal disputes about the claims and legal transactions mentioned in No. 1 to 5.

criticism

Of consumer advocates , the XI. Civil Senate criticizes that its decisions are regularly too bank-friendly and to the detriment of consumers , for example in the so-called junk property cases .

In the dispute over so-called scrap real estate , the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ( C-350/03 and C-229/04 ) corrected the Federal Court of Justice, but also the German legislature in 2005, to the effect that it was for the acceptance of a revocable, door-to-door sales It does not matter whether a bank knows that its loan agreements are being sold in so-called door-to-door situations. These decisions, however, hardly favor the buyers of so-called scrap real estate in the end, since according to them the purchase contract for the property cannot be canceled at the same time and they are therefore still obliged under Section 357 of the German Civil Code to repay the loan granted to the seller of the property .

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. Distribution of the BGH's business ( memento of April 22, 2018 in the Internet Archive ) (accessed on April 22, 2018)
  2. ^ Occupation of the XI. Civil Senate on the website of the Federal Court of Justice
  3. https://www.bundesgerichtshof.de/DE/DasGericht/Geschaeftsversorgung/Geschaeftsverteilungsplan2019/Praesidiumsbeschluesse2019/praesidiumsbeschluesse2019.html?nn=11078186#Beschluss290819
  4. Federal Court of Justice - Business Distribution Plan 2018. Accessed April 29, 2018 .