TorteDeForm

Cyrus Dugger

How an Important German Constitutional Court Decision May Change the Nature of Law Practice in Germany

From Findlaw.com:

How an Important German Constitutional Court Decision May Change the Nature of Law Practice in Germany By ANTHONY J. SEBOK Mar. 13, 2007

Last week, the German Constitutional Court(the "Bundesverfassungsgericht") published a decision that may have far-reaching implications for how law is practiced in Germany. The Court decided that a law barring contingency fees in all cases was unconstitutional. It held that, under certain narrow circumstances, there was a constitutional right to be able to bring a civil action by means of a contingency fee contract with a lawyer.

The Facts Behind the Suit

The case arose as a result of a lawsuit brought by a woman the court referred to as "Frau Hanna N." She is a descendant of a German Jew who wished to sue to receive compensation for the expropriation by the German government of an estate near Dresden. In 1990, a lawyer, "Frau Dr. T." offered to litigate the suit for a 33% contingency fee. In 1998, Frau Dr. T. prevailed and received compensation on behalf of her client of DM 312,000 (about $204,000), of which she took DM 104,000 (about $68,000).

According to statute, that was illegal: (keep reading)

Cyrus Dugger: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 2:06 PM, Mar 22, 2007 in
Permalink | Email to Friend | Comments (1)


Comments

Germany is another nation with a crippling excess of lawyers, devastating the growth of their economy. This is natural lawless rent seeking by the cult criminal on the bench.

Historically, the contingency did not serve greater access to the court for the poor. It was a collection method. Until the early 19th Century, the plaintiff paid the lawyer by the hour. The plaintiff would collect the verdict or settlement. Then the sleazeball would refuse to pay the lawyer's hourly bill. The lawyer devised the contingency fee as a way to collect fees and expenses before the plaintiff. Now, the plaintiff collects the crumbs. The plaintiff has to pay taxes on the entire amount, unless collected for an injury. The plaintiff is lucky to not end up with a net loss after the IRS collects its tax on the entire amount.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | March 22, 2007 8:36 PM