Federal Constitutional Court Relies upon MPI Expert Analysis in its Decision
14.06.2007
Civil class actions in the U.S. allow a group of similarly injured individuals to collectively seek legal damages. The service of a class action complaint in Germany generally poses legal tensions due to the frequently conflicting means of calculating damages, occurring for example when under U.S. law a higher level of punitive damages has been claimed. German firms often see the filing of a class action as an attempt by U.S. complainants to generate public pressure and obtain an unjustified settlement. Thus, demands for substantial punitive damages produce an immediate desire to prevent the very service of a class action claim. In the opinion of the Constitutional Court however, the service of a class action lawsuit is compatible with the German Constitution. This conclusion was determined to be no less valid upon consideration of other particularities inherent to the U.S. legal system (e.g. evidentiary procedures, reimbursement of cost rules). It was however noted that refusing to recognize a judgment, as may be appropriate in a given case, remains the province of German law.In several instances the Court supported its decision with reference to a publication of the Max Planck Institute. Specifically, the July 2006 release by Mohr/Siebeck Publishing (Tübingen), "Rechtshilfe und Rechtsstaat – Die Zustellung einer US-amerikanischen class action in Deutschland" by Prof. Dr. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Klaus J. Hopt, Director at the Institute, Priv.-Doz. Dr. Rainer Kulms, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute and Priv.-Doz. Dr. Jan von Hein, University of Trier. The study therein emanated from an expert report (Gutachten) which the Institute had prepared at the request of the Federal Constitutional Court after the court had issued an injunction prohibiting the service of a U.S. class action lawsuit in the closely-followed Bertelsmann-Napster proceeding.