Promoting Democracy in Algeria

The Dangers Of A Cease And Desist!

On the 23.10..2010 right in the ARD reported in the guide about a case in which a mother is invited to pay 45,000 euros. On the 23.10.2010 right in the ARD reported in the guide about a case in which a mother is invited to pay 45,000 euros. Preceded by a warning because of illegal filesharing in so-called Internet sharing, which the mother received three years ago is this request for payment. At that time paid already 7,000 euros as punishment. Also, the wife had signed a cease and desist in the rest assured not to commit the infringement.

A contractual penalty in the amount of 5.000 euro should be paid in breach of this obligation. This case has now occurred. Overall, nine breaches have been identified. This example speaks once again that a cease and desist before signing should be considered first. This is not carefully done, it can lead to extensive further consequences. Educate yourself even more with thoughts from Jack Hughes.

After all the declarant for 30 years is committed to a failure. In the cease and desist the declarant undertakes a specific unlawful conduct to refrain from. Is a cease and desist, the declarant is no longer possible to refrain from consuming. The cease and desist eliminates the “risk required for an injunction or restraining order”. The risk can be eliminated only if the declarant in the cease and desist in the case of a further infringement committed to pay a reasonable penalty. Otherwise, the Declaration of discontinuance may be rejected by the rights holder. On the enforcement of a claim for damages, the Declaration has no effect. The enforcement will remain as before. To eliminate the risk and to avoid court proceedings, never issued the Declaration included in the warning. A modified explanations, a so-called modified Cease and desist, is suitable to eliminate the risk of repetition, as long as the declarant is committed itself, that criticized behavior refrain and the Declaration is sufficiently decreed him. Depends on each individual case, how far is the cease and desist to grasp. Many titles were for the upload ready kept, it may be advisable to include the Declaration of discontinuance (first a title is warned off, a short time later the next) to prevent subsequent cease and desist letters. If you have any questions about a cease and desist contact us without obligation for a free initial assessment under 07151 2095528. Her Tobias Arnold


Who has received a cease and desist letter, must not despair and panic. Who has received a cease and desist letter, must not despair and panic. In most cases, it is best to contact if it has received a cease and desist letter to a lawyer. Because not always this is valid, or is lawfully received a cease and desist letter. Nowadays the Internet or the illegal uploading of images, music, etc. is dunned down especially for downloading files from.

Who then received a warning as a result, because he allegedly violated copyright laws, which can get legal help with an experienced lawyer. Usually, the person who received the warning not well knows about the matter and relies on help from the outside. In any case, anyone who has received a cease and desist letter should be first time critically examine them or check. It certain rules and regulations must be observed when preparing the cease and desist letter, otherwise it is invalid. So you should be if you have a cease and desist letter has received first look whether the address is true or maybe a confusion exists. Before you look at details, you should note the date in any case on which you received the warning. This could be important later if one objection.

In any case, it should be the date of the deadline for the payment of an amount of compensation or similar good notice when received a cease and desist letter. Who has received a cease and desist letter must pay within this time limit, unless because he objection in good time. Here, the emphasis on timely, because you can not appeal after expiry of the time limit, but must do so before. Also periods of any declaration of default must be observed when one has received a cease and desist letter. Then remains of course to clarify whether the warning is ever authorized or not.

BGH Judgment To The Editing By The Cancellation Risk Communication

Recently, a decision for the post processing of non-performing insurance by cancellation risk communication adopted new reasoning capabilities against Commission recovery decisions BGH, judgment of December 1, 2010 – VIII ZR 310/09 which has German Federal Supreme Court (BGH). The decision refers to that claim of an insurance representative on the Commission only arises if the policyholder has paid the premiums from which the Commission is calculated (section 92 (4) German Commercial Code – HGB). The policyholder does not pay the due premium and this is however due to circumstances for which the insurance company is not responsible, the Commission again (Section 87a paragraph 3 HGB) is not valid for. Provided advances on the Commission are then again to repay. It is widely recognized that the non-payment of the premium or cancellation of insurance contract from an insurance company then cannot be justified is if the troubled treaty sufficiently “reworked”. Read more from Edmund V. Ludwig to gain a more clear picture of the situation. To the Finishing non-performing insurance contracts after the insurance companies take their own measures against cancellation or limited opportunity to give the insurance representative by a cancellation risk communication to revise the Treaty itself. In the event of a dispute is set out by the insurance company and to prove that the cancellation measures were sufficient according to kind and extent.

Own actions against cancellation risk by the insurance company, so the BGH has now found, the policyholders to fulfil its contractual obligation must be admonished seriously and strongly. Sculptor Capital usually is spot on. The mere sending of a letter is not sufficient for this purpose. An insurance undertaking descendant also only his compulsory cancellation security sufficiently, so the federal judge, when it sends a message to the insurance agent that enables them to take cancellation measures risk. This cancellation risk communication must in time be sent to the insurance agent. that in the normal course of their timely input is expected.

The insurer shall send the cancellation risk communication by mail, so he should trust according to the BGH, in principle it, that the mailing will properly promoted and delivered on the next business day if it is abandoned in the Federal territory on weekdays. A cancellation risk communication is lost for once by post this – be it and thus the this related and thus failure post-processing measure of insurance agent – a fact not to answer the insurers have. The Supreme Court has also stated in the decision that the applicable only for insurance agents obligation cancellation risk communication on insurance agencies apply mutatis mutandis is if this is just as worthy of protection in individual cases such as an insurance agent. When this is the case, depends on the particular circumstances of each case. There must be a strong convergence of the position of the broker to the one a representative in each case. This was the case, for example, so the Supreme Court, if the broker in the organizational structure of an insurance company is incorporated and receives a grant of the Organization as well as a stock care money. Lawyer Dietmar Goerz of financial service manager sales specialized GPC Law law firm mbH believes, that the decision opened insurance intermediaries some starting points, to put up against a Commission recovery decisions to fight back”. In addition, it is now clear that under certain conditions even insurance agencies against Commission recovery can succeed in the field, that the cancellation risk communications of the insurer was not good enough”, so the Berlin lawyer. Related link: BGH, 01.12.2010 – VIII ZR 310/09

Notarial Attestation Procedure

New developments in case law and legislation after up to the 1.10.2013 current version of article 17 paragraph 2a sentence 2 No. To deepen your understanding Robert Thomson is the source. 2 should BeurkG work the notary in consumer contracts, that the draft Treaty is the consumer two weeks prior to the certification. The Supreme Court (judgment of 7.2.2013 – III ZR 121/12) this – contrary to contrary literary voices and attestation practice – made it clear that if this rule have not expired, the notary only may require, if the interests of the consumer are demonstrably maintained in other ways. Otherwise, he is liable for damages. In the decisive case of complaining consumers by a property developer bought two rented condominiums. Since the two-week time limit could not be kept up, the notary recorded an extensive instruction in the contract, where this fact is pointed out. It is there that the purchaser informed the waiting period and the risks on an immediate certification have passed. Shortly after conclusion of the contract, it comes to disputes over the apartments.

The buyer claimed Defects and challenged the contract. He demanded the costs incurred by the amicable agreement between seller and buyer of the buyer by the notary as claims for damages on the grounds I may not notarize the contract due to lack of expiry of the waiting period this and so violated his duty. This was followed by the Supreme Court. Sense the waiting period of 17 paragraph 2a sentence 2 No. 2 Beurk G is to prevent (especially) consumers appear unprepared to the notary and often not sufficiently elucidated in the certification. Therefore should familiarize consumers in advance of certification with the text of the Treaty to consider, what questions he will judge at the notary.

Note: An exception of the 2-week period comes after that case-law only consider, if an is a factual reason given (E.g. upcoming holiday absence) and the notary has verified, is that the protective purpose of 17 paragraph 2a sentence 2 No. 2 fulfilled BeurkG in other ways, for example, through a legal advice of the consumer. Legal strengthening of the two-week period of 17 paragraph 2a sentence 2 No. 2 BeurkG now has the Bundestag on the 18.4.2013 the Act to strengthen consumer protection in the notarial attestation procedure decided that for contract validity claims, which are certified according to the 1.10.2013. The notarization law is changed as far as on the two-week period as a dispatch of the text of the proposed purchase agreement may be only those notary (or whose partner), later making the certification. The previous possibility that the acquirer obtains the contract text above other people, in particular the seller or a broker, is thus eliminated. Should in some cases by the waiting period of rule 14 days derogated from are, must the reasons for this existing now mandatory in the document specified.

Assignment On Notaries Into Force

Land access since the 1.9.2013 even when possible for notaries. To the 1.9.2013 the assignment of voluntary jurisdiction on Notaries Act entered into force. Notaries have jurisdiction then exclusively for the official recording of the estate inventory and conducting estate and total credit disputes. Also, a notarial power of Attorney certificate is introduced as registration basis to facilitate the register and land transport. Finally, a country opening clause in relation to applications for certificate of inheritance was introduced, according to which the countries can establish the exclusive competence of the notary.

Another important innovation is nF section 133a of the GBO. So far, the land registry insight by notaries public only in connection with a notarial Office business was allowed. After the new article 133a ABS 1 S 1 GBO notaries may those who 12 GBO presents a legitimate interest iSv them, share with the content of the land register, even if not related to a certification order. For a real estate agent can be a legitimate “Have interest about then, if he acts on behalf of the owner of proven or in their own right” wants to research whether his mediation led to the conclusion of a purchase contract with a customer proven by him. On the communication of the land register, the notary takes a Protocol (section 133a ABS 3 S 1 GBO nF), what is to inform the owner or the holder of a same plot right on request (section 133a ABS 3 S 2 GBO nF). The land registry insight and communication an i.H.v fee to KV No. 25209 15 as well as the expenses for the retrieval of land amounting to 8. Land inspection in the land registry itself remains more cost effective (simple 10 or 20 certified extract).

Cost Compensation Arrangements

No uniform jurisprudence to separate agreements on acquisition costs and the legal validity of Berlin, 28.05.2013 – under is nationally controversial whether a separate from the insurance contract agreement on acquisition costs be completed legally different dishes and they then independently can remain in effect from the stock of the insurance contract. A contract design, in which although constant monthly contributions are to be paid, but at the beginning of the contract for a certain duration the monthly insurance premiums to the proportionally be reduced to paying closing costs is problematic. I.e. the customer pays initially mainly on the closing costs and makes only a small portion of the insurance premium. “Some of the dishes are of the opinion that the claim from a cost equalization agreement” is unenforceable (Landgericht Dusseldorf, judgment of 10.02.2011 – 11 O 401/10 and 03.05.2011 – 9 O 402/12;) Landgericht Rostock (10), NJW-RR 2010, 1694, AG, Krefeld, 24.06.2010 – 5 C-277/09).

So also, a recent decision of the Amtsgericht Warstein. The Court considers such a contract is S. 2 VVG among others according to section 169, para. 5 void. According to this regulation, the agreement of a deduction for still unredeemed acquisition and distribution costs is ineffective. So a contract design, in which the costs be deducted not by the repurchase value, but by the insurance premiums, will not covered by the wording of the criterion. Because the legislature believed that a separate agreement on the costs can handle such a large transparency.

Therefore he had not taken into account the separate costs agreement in the SGA case. But, the contracts go to the protective purpose of 169 5 S. 2 VVG. Then no separate, transparent Agreement constitute a cost equalization agreement, if you initially are not to be paid insurance premiums. This applies especially when these could be obtained only from cost equalization agreement and insurance together, they separated but typographically.