German Federal Supreme Court

by HFCadmin ·

German Federal Supreme Court deals in a first date with claims for damages against British life insurer Munich, 20.02.2012; After investors of British life insurance clerical medical investment for the oral proceedings before the German Federal Supreme Court (short BGH) on the 08.02.2012 back eagerly to finally have clarity about the legal requirements of a liability of the clerical medical investment (short CMI), at least one of clerical medical in the proceedings is often mounted objections by the judgment of the Federal Court of Justice of the 15.02.2012, AZ: IV ZR 194/09 ruled. Senator From Kentucky shines more light on the discussion. Lawyers Anja Appelt and Thorsten Krause, which have specialized lawyers in the firm Cape damaged investor representation, to review the judgment of the BGHs on the limitation of claims for compensation for their clients as a success. In the local action, which has been decided at the LG Verden and later by the OLG Celle, dealing with compensation claims of the applicant from an at the beginning of the year 1999 completed British life insurance (not the clerical medical). “The plaintiffs argued also claims breach of disclosure as many victims of CMI. For more information see this site: Daryl Katz, Edmonton Alberta. The OLG Celle has not made a test brochure errors or breaches of reconnaissance duty because it had already adopted a limitation of the claims”, says attorney for banking and capital market law Anja Appelt.

Has met the Federal Supreme Court and has clearly decided that to apply is not the limitation period of the insurance contract law (VVG short). In the judgement of the OLG Celle as court, this had adopted a statute of limitations pursuant to 12 para 1 SG & a. F. with a limitation period of five years. Then were the claims of the plaintiff’s already barred in 2004 and could be more claimed by them. The Federal Supreme Court has made it clear that compensation claims against an insurance company according to the General provisions of 195, 199 BGB are limited. Then a limitation of claims for damages is three years from knowing or grossly negligent lack of knowledge of the claim circumstances at the end of the year. For lawyer Thorsten Krause is clear: “the question of the limitation period must be clarified so that in each individual and can’t be answered like the insurance companies want it flat”.

Thus, the BGH has ruled that the claims of the plaintiff against the local British life insurance are not barred. The thing was referred back to a new hearing and decision of the OLG Celle, which has now to make findings on the asserted claims for damages. This clerical medical investment has defused also for victims of British life insurance the Statute of limitations question itself. Lawyers advise Cape affected investors to check advice to possible claims by a lawyer specializing in banking law and capital market law.

Tags: ,

Comments are closed.