LEGAL+ NEWS

Contractual agreement on the performance of a formal acceptance procedure

Particularly in the case of complex (plant) construction projects, the contracting parties often agree – usually on the basis of the VOB/B – to carry out a so-called formal acceptance. The acceptance of a work performance means the recognition of the work as being essentially in accordance with the contract. Acceptance is particularly important in construction law. It is associated with considerable legal consequences, such as

  • the transfer of risk,
  • a reversal of the burden of proof with regard to the existence of defects and
  • the end of the fulfillment stage.

In addition, a significant part of the remuneration claim regularly requires prior acceptance.

The following article deals with the question of what such a formal acceptance is actually all about.

The essence of formal acceptance

The central feature of formal acceptance is that the parties have expressly agreed on the receipt of a corresponding declaration of intent requiring receipt as a declaration of acceptance.

Statutory and/or contractual acceptance requirements irrelevant if formal acceptance is agreed

In the event of an agreement on express acceptance (formal acceptance is a special form of express acceptance), the statutory and/or contractual acceptance requirements are not a prerequisite for the effects of acceptance to occur.

The customer is therefore free to accept a work even if the conditions for acceptance, i.e. readiness for acceptance, are not met (examples: work still incomplete, significant defects, etc.).

Other forms of acceptance (initially) excluded

Acceptance is generally possible in various ways. For example, acceptance can also take place implicitly (through conclusive behavior) or by the contractor not accepting the work despite proper completion of the work and an unsuccessfully set deadline for acceptance (so-called fictitious acceptance).

The agreement to carry out a formal acceptance then (initially) means that other forms of acceptance are excluded.

Carrying out the formal acceptance

There are no mandatory (legal) requirements for formal acceptance. However, it follows from the fact that formal acceptance requires the receipt of a corresponding express declaration of acceptance that a – not mandatory – joint acceptance meeting regularly takes place for the purpose of formal acceptance, the results of which are recorded in a protocol.

Formal requirements – minutes are sufficient

The declaration of acceptance can be made by the customer to the contractor in writing or verbally (also) independently of the preparation of a written record.

The formal requirements of formal acceptance are therefore satisfied in any case with the preparation of a protocol. Signatures under the minutes are therefore not required for the effectiveness of the acceptance and the occurrence of the acceptance effects, but are recommended.

Important: Subsequent waiver of formal acceptance possible

As already mentioned, the agreement of a formal acceptance means that other forms of acceptance are generally excluded. However, this only applies “initially”, because even if formal acceptance is contractually agreed, formal acceptance may be subsequently waived, either expressly or impliedly.

This may be the case, for example, if the client accepts the work without comment for several months or if, after a corresponding period of use of the work, it can no longer be expected that the client will demand formal acceptance after all(Havers, loc. cit., cf. also Keine in: Bock/Zons, Rechtshandbuch Anlagenbau, Part B, VII Acceptance, para. 42; Hilger/Kaminsky, Anlagenbau im In- und Ausland, para. 434).

The OLG Bamberg states in this regard:

“According to the prevailing opinion in case law and literature, acceptance by conclusive action through putting into use by the client (sic!) in accordance with § 12 No. 5 VOB/B even in the case of a formal acceptance agreement in the contract, if it can be established that the parties have waived the agreed acceptance by conclusive conduct (BGH NJW 93, 1063) (…)”. (OLG Bamberg, judgment of May 5, 1997 – 4 U 188/96 -, para. 9, juris)

The problem here is that, in contrast to conceivable fictitious acceptance by commissioning, where acceptance is fictitious regardless of the will of the client, tacit acceptance as a declaration of intent by the client presupposes a corresponding will to accept.

The BGH explains:

“In order to assume a tacit acceptance of work, however, facts must be established from which it is unambiguous that the parties have waived the agreed formal acceptance of work by conclusive conduct.” (BGH, judgment of 03.11.1992, ref.: X ZR 83/90 – this also concerned plant construction, EDP system)

Construction worker in protective uniform shaking hands with businessman in hardhat at construction

Refusal of acceptance only permissible in the event of significant defects – Unjustified refusal of acceptance nevertheless results in acceptance effects

The client may only refuse acceptance if the work to be accepted has significant defects. The corresponding provisions in Section 640 BGB and Section 12 (3) VOB/B are identical in this respect. The decisive question is whether the effects of acceptance occur or not. This is the case if acceptance was wrongly refused due to the absence of significant defects. All consequences of acceptance then occur even without the will of the client – regardless of whether the refusal of acceptance is provisional, conditional or final (see Messerschmidt in Messerschmidt/Voit, Privates Baurecht, § 640 BGB, para. 237 f.; Bröker loc. cit., para. 25 ff. in each case with further references).

It therefore depends on whether there is a significant defect. Please read my separate article.

Do you have any questions?

LATEST ARTICLES

Vertragsgestaltung im Vertragsrecht – klare Regelungen
International procedural law

Enforcement of international jurisdiction agreements: What to do in the event of an action from abroad despite an exclusive jurisdiction agreement to the contrary?

In order to avoid costly and unpleasant legal disputes abroad, it is advisable to conclude exclusive jurisdiction agreements with foreign business partners which stipulate that only German courts have jurisdiction. However, it is not uncommon for the business partner to file a lawsuit in their own country in the event of a dispute, contrary to the jurisdiction agreement. In such cases, the question arises: What can be done to enforce international choice of court agreements?

Read more "

CONTACT

LEGAL+

+49 (40) 57199 74 80

+49 (170) 1203 74 0

Neuer Wall 61 D-20354 Hamburg

kontakt@legal-plus.eu

Benefit from my active network!

I look forward to our networking.

Copyright 2025 © All rights reserved.

This post is also available in: DE