LEGAL+ NEWS
In my blog post “Can so-called warning associations do anything? – On the liability for damages of warning associations such as the Association of Social Competition (VSW)” I had already reported from practical experience on the fact that so-called warning associations – covered by the courts – are still acting to the detriment of market participants.
 
															With its recent action against influencers, the Association of Social Competition (VSW) has attracted a lot of media attention and thus – unintentionally – finally brought movement to the question of what warning associations may and may not do. The “Handelsblatt” has now – also with my support – in its latest weekend edition of March 15/16/17, 2019 provided valuable clarification regarding the questionable actions of the VSW.
The legal consequence of the actions of VSW and, of course, of any other warning association can be, as I have explained in my article mentioned above above, may include an obligation to pay damages to injured market participants.
 
															LATEST ARTICLES

Procedural law: The inactive expert witness
The inactive expert witness is a major dilemma for those affected. The legislator has certainly recognized this and, with a reform of the law on expert witnesses with effect from 15.10.2016, has anchored quite relevant tightening in civil procedure law.

Evidential value of private expert opinions
The evidentiary value of private expert opinions is very close to that of court expert opinions. In practice, this is often not the case: many courts tend to regard private expert opinions, i.e. expert opinions commissioned outside the proceedings, as a nuisance. These expert opinions, which are usually “labeled” as biased, are therefore in most cases considered to be of lesser value than court-commissioned expert opinions and are downgraded in the judgment with clichéd justifications. However, this approach, which is widespread in practice, is not covered by supreme court case law! In fact, expert opinions provided by the parties are important for the constitutionally guaranteed legal protection of the parties. This is the only way to fully uncover – not infrequent – errors in court reports.

BGH ruling “Influencer II”
LEGAL+ NEWS BGH ruling “Influencer II” In its “Influencer II”
CONTACT
 
															+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.
This post is also available in: DE
 
								
