German court ruling opens door to introduction of success fees
Law firms in Germany are a step closer to being able to charge success fees after a ruling earlier this month that the fee arrangements should be allowed under some circumstances
July 31, 2008 at 12:04 AM
2 minute read
Law firms in Germany are a step closer to being able to charge success fees after a ruling earlier this month that the fee arrangements should be allowed under some circumstances.
Firms will now be able to agree a portion of their fees based on the successful outcome of a project – but only if the client is unable to pay by any other means.
The change follows a 2006 constitutional court ruling that found the complete ban clashed with the country's constitution.
In its current form, the 1 July ruling is likely to have the biggest impact on smaller firms acting on litigation cases.
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Hamburg litigation partner Jan Willisch said: "People are taking an interest in the new law because they are fighting for a more general allowance of success fees. [As it stands] it will not affect anyone at Freshfields – we simply do not have clients that cannot afford litigation. The same probably goes for all the other big firms. This will affect small firms with private clients – but it is a bit of a gamble."
Linklaters' ex-managing partner for Germany, litigation partner Markus Hartung, said: "Smaller firms could be interested, or firms interested in insurance law."
However, German partners hope the ruling could be an initial step towards opening up the wider issues of success fees and other billing options to debate.
If the laws are expanded so that firms can use success fees without restrictions on corporate deals and litigation without the stringent restrictions – as is possible in other countries – the impact of the court's ruling would be far wider.
Hartung added: "We are not keen on success fees – as a lawyer I prefer to work on hourly rates, not a premium alone. What we want is more flexibility in negotiating fees. If we are part of a chain involving investment bankers and accountants, who
are all free to negotiate their fees, why should lawyers be treated differently?"
Stefan Ruetzel, head of Gleiss Lutz's litigation practice, said: "I would certainly welcome a further relaxation. It would give a broader variety of billing approaches.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFidal Launches Disputes Practice; Pinsent’s Paris Arbitration Partner Jumps to Boutique Firm, Plus Other French Moves
5 minute readTop Labor Lawyer and Former Germany Managing Partner Leaves A&O Shearman to Found Boutique Firm
3 minute readNoerr’s Former Polish Office Merges With Big Professional Services Firm Eying German-Speaking Clients
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 2Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 3Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 4Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
- 5Freshfields Hires Ex-SEC Corporate Finance Director in Silicon Valley
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250