10 Things You Need to Know About Insurance Dispute Resolution in Germany
10 Things You Need to Know About Insurance Dispute Resolution in Germany
Navigating insurance disputes in Germany may feel like uncharted waters for many legal professionals outside the country. German insurance law is heavily codified, process-driven, and shaped by a strong tradition of consumer protection. If you're dealing with cross-border claims or advising multinational clients, these ten key insights will help you better understand how insurance disputes are handled under German law.
Ihr Ansprechpartner
Dr. Fabian Herdter, LL.M. Eur.
1. Insurers Can Walk Away – But Only Under Strict Conditions
Insurers in Germany have powerful remedies at their disposal, but they can only exercise them under clearly defined circumstances. If a policyholder intentionally causes the insured event, or breaches obligations (like providing false information or failing to mitigate damages), the insurer may be released from liability altogether. In cases of gross negligence, the insurer can reduce payment proportionally.
Non-disclosure or misrepresentation also carries weight. If the insured failed to disclose material risks, the insurer can terminate or withdraw from the contract, depending on whether the omission was negligent or intentional. However, these remedies only apply if the breach was relevant to the claim, which often needs to be determined by a court.
2. Full Disclosure Is Required – Until Coverage Is Denied
German insurance law imposes strict cooperation obligations on policyholders once a claim is filed. Most notably, the insured must disclose all information the insurer deems relevant to assessing coverage, the cause of loss, or the amount of damage. This includes submitting documents, answering questions, and facilitating inspections if needed. Failing to comply can jeopardize the claim – particularly if the non-cooperation is deemed intentional or grossly negligent.
However, this duty is not unlimited in time. If the insurer issues a formal denial of coverage, the insured's duty to cooperate (especially with regard to further disclosure) comes to an end. From that point, the relationship shifts from claim handling to legal dispute, and the insured can focus on enforcing its rights in court without risking a procedural misstep through incomplete disclosure.
3. Insurance Disputes Are Handled by Civil Courts – With Structured Paths of Appeal
Insurance disputes in Germany are resolved through the civil court system. Claims up to €5,000 are filed with local courts (Amtsgericht), while higher-value disputes go to regional courts (Landgericht). The insured may sue at either the insurer’s or their own place of business, offering strategic venue options.
Importantly, the German system offers a three-tier court structure. Appeals go to the Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht), and in exceptional cases (such as those involving questions of general legal importance) a final appeal may be made to the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof). This layered approach provides legal clarity, but it also means that disputes can stretch out over time if fully litigated.
4. Pre-Trial Strategy and Procedure Matter
German insurance disputes hinge not only on legal merit but also on procedural precision. Key considerations before litigating include:
- identifying the competent court (often with some choice of venue),
- confirming if arbitration is required,
- calculating potential litigation costs (fees are based on the value in dispute), and
- securing critical evidence (e.g., expert opinions or witness statements) in advance.
5. Mind the Clock: Insurance Claims Expire After Three Years
Disputes often begin when insurers reject claims, e.g. by citing exclusions, insufficient documentation, or breach of obligations. Once a claim is denied, the insured typically asserts a right to coverage under the contract. German law imposes a three-year limitation period, generally starting at the end of the year when the insured knew (or ought to have known) the facts giving rise to the claim.
6. Policy Terms Are Interpreted Strictly
The courts interpret insurance policies from the standpoint of a reasonable policyholder, not a legal or industry insider. Any ambiguity in standard terms (most policies in Germany use standardized wordings) will be interpreted against the insurer. Provisions deemed unfair or overly burdensome to the insured may be void.
7. Procedural Formalities Are Strictly Applied
German litigation involves a document-centric process. Written submissions carry more weight than courtroom drama. Judges actively manage the case, there is no jury. Courts are less tolerant of tactical delays or late-stage surprises. Evidence must be presented in full at the appropriate stage, and failure to comply with deadlines can be fatal to a claim.
8. There Are No Punitive Damages
Unlike some jurisdictions, punitive or exemplary damages do not exist under German law. Compensation is aimed strictly at covering actual losses. That makes it critical to document the full extent of damages early, especially where consequential losses (e.g., business interruption) may be in dispute.
9. Court Fees Are Predictable And Often Recoverable
German procedural law provides clear, predictable cost structures. Court fees depend on the value of the claim, are due upfront, and are calculated by statute. The party that loses the case must cover court fees and statutory legal fees of the other side. However, statutory rates may fall short of actual fees if a party hires specialized lawyers on an hourly basis. This makes it essential to assess cost-risk ratios early on.
10. Litigation Can Be Lengthy
A full court process can involve three levels of review and take several years. In commercial policies, many parties agree to arbitration clauses to expedite proceedings and gain procedural flexibility. Arbitration is enforceable under German law and may offer quicker, more confidential outcomes, and are especially useful in high-value or sensitive matters. Negotiations are another widely-used way to settle disputes.
Final Thoughts
Insurance dispute resolution in Germany offers a structured, rules-driven process, but one that rewards preparation, precision, and a firm grasp of statutory obligations. For international stakeholders, understanding the timing, tactics, and tone of German litigation is essential to managing both risks and expectations.
If you’d like help handling a specific dispute or reviewing your policy in light of German legal standards, feel free to get in touch.
Recent News
Recent News
Regresswahrung im Versicherungsrecht: Ein Drahtseilakt für Versicherungsnehmer
Regresswahrung im Versicherungsrecht: Ein Drahtseilakt für Versicherungsnehmer
Versicherungsnehmer müssen mögliche Ansprüche gegen Dritte wahren. Doch wie weit reicht diese Obliegenheit – etwa wenn das Unternehmen eigentlich gar nicht gegen den Dritten vorgehen will? Ricardo Grocholl gibt einen Überblick.
Wenn der Cyberschaden zum D&O-Fall wird
Wenn der Cyberschaden zum D&O-Fall wird
Lehnt der Cyberversicherer die Deckung eines Cyberschadens ab, so kann schnell die Haftung eines Managers im Raums stehen. Petra Ruf und Dr. David Ulrich zeigten in ihrem Vortrag auf, unter welchen Bedingungen ein Cyberschaden unter der D&O-Versicherung gedeckt sein kann.
(K)ein Auskunftsanspruch zur Deckung?
(K)ein Auskunftsanspruch zur Deckung?
Warum der Versicherte schon vorher wissen darf, dass der D&O-Versicherer nicht zahlen wird – Plädoyer für ein Auskunftsrecht der versicherten Personen in der Managerhaftpflicht, von Alicia Vedugo Morales.
Claims-made: Geburtsfehler der D&O-Versicherung?
Claims-made: Geburtsfehler der D&O-Versicherung?
Der Versicherungsfall in der D&O tritt erst bei der schriftlichen Inanspruchnahme des Versicherten ein. Das kann für die Beteiligten Nachteile bergen. In seinem Vortrag erläuterte Dr. Fabian Herdter die Probleme dieses sogenannten Claims-made-Prinzips.
Spontane Anzeigepflicht, Arglist und die D&O-Versicherung: Neue Rechtsprechung wirft Fragen auf
Spontane Anzeigepflicht, Arglist und die D&O-Versicherung: Neue Rechtsprechung wirft Fragen auf
Versicherungsnehmer müssen nur solche Gefahrumstände anzeigen, nach denen der Versicherer fragt. Diesen Grundsatz stellt das OLG Hamm für die D&O-Versicherung nun in Frage, wie Dr. Fabian Herdter erläutert.
Auflagen in der Cyberversicherung – die unterschätzte Gefahr
Auflagen in der Cyberversicherung – die unterschätzte Gefahr
Wenn der Cyberversicherer seinen Schutz mit Auflagen verbindet, kann das für Unternehmen Chance und Risiko zugleich sein. Worauf zu achten ist, beschreiben Dr. David Ulrich und Johannes Stanglmeier.
Verzinsung von Versicherungsleistungen – Potenziale und Fallstricke in der Praxis
Verzinsung von Versicherungsleistungen – Potenziale und Fallstricke in der Praxis
Umfangreiche Sachschäden reguliert der Versicherer oft erst nach Jahren. Stehen Versicherungsnehmern in diesem Fall Zinsen zu? Johannes Laiblin und Tobias Wessel geben darauf Antworten.
"Top-Kanzlei für Prozessführung": WirtschaftsWoche zeichnet WILHELM aus
"Top-Kanzlei für Prozessführung": WirtschaftsWoche zeichnet WILHELM aus
In ihrer aktuellen Ausgabe zeichnet die WirtschaftsWoche die führenden Kanzleien in der gerichtlichen Streitbeilegung aus. WILHELM ist erstmalig unter den genannten "Top-Kanzleien" und Dr. Fabian Herdter einer der führenden Anwälte.
Exportkreditgarantien: Lückenhafter Schutzschild für kritische Ausfuhrprojekte?
Exportkreditgarantien: Lückenhafter Schutzschild für kritische Ausfuhrprojekte?
In seinem Vortrag bei der Veranstaltung „Kreditrisiken 2024“ des GVNW erläuterte Dr. Fabian Herdter die Fallstricke der auch als Hermesdeckungen bekannten Exportkreditgarantien.