German Federal Court of Justice, 13 March 2003
Germany Federal Court of Justice
13 March 2003, VII ZR 370/98, BGHZ 154, 185 (2003)
- Written by Curtis Parvin, JD
Facts
A Dutch corporation (plaintiff) hired a company (the contractor) (defendant) to renovate a motel in 1992. The contractor did the work but in an allegedly defective manner. The Dutch company asked the contractor to correct the alleged deficiencies, but the contractor refused. While this dispute was ongoing, the Dutch company was sold to two German nationals who conducted business primarily in Germany. The new German owners did not seek to reincorporate the Dutch company in Germany. The Dutch company then filed suit in Germany to recover damages from the contractor. The trial court dismissed the case after finding that the Dutch company lacked the capacity to sue in Germany. The Dutch company appealed, but the appellate court affirmed the trial court because the Dutch company had failed to reincorporate in Germany. The Dutch company appealed to the Germany Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof). [Editor’s Note: The Germany Federal Court of Justice is Germany’s highest civil and criminal jurisdiction court.]
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.