Dresden District Court

The plaintiff sued the defendant on transfer of business shares obtained from the V2 to V9. They were of the opinion, the defendant had to pay damages committed, as he did from the outset ruthlessly persecuted the goal to transfer the ownership of the V2-V9. The hearing of V2-V9 in the date of the hearing has revealed that this was mostly unaware that the second notary 2008, but suitable was not a mere confirmation of the assignment directed, to thwart the pre-emption rights of the plaintiff and to establish compensation obligations of the V2-V9. The decision: The Dresden District Court upheld the claim and condemned the defendant by way of restitution to the transfer of the shares. The Dresden State Court considers the involvement of a third party to the breach a deliberate immoral injury of the creditors represents a party if other circumstances the action of third parties as with a loyal legal disposition seem incompatible.

The Dresden State Court assessed the conduct of the defendant as immoral: the defendant was necessarily interested in to make right the purchase contracts. According to the judgment in the parallel proceedings V1 was aware that the assignment of the year 2008 was schuldrechtlich and in-kind ineffective. The Dresden State Court continued that the defendant only has brought the effective transfer of business shares the second notary, to which he had invited under the pretext of the affirmation of the assignment. According to the findings of the District Court of Dresden was known that up to V9 the legal scope of the second assignment, designated by him as confirmation of the V2 was unaware the defendant at the Organization of the second notary appointment. The Dresden District Court saw an information gap of the defendant herein at the expense of V 2 to V9, which he legally advised intentionally immoral intent to cause damage has exploited, to make right the share purchases by the new making of the assignment. The judgment of the LG Dresden is not yet final.

Conclusion: Be thwarted exercised pre-emption rights, not only the contractual partner is damages in certain cases. Under certain Also the one on whose behalf the pre-emption rights have been thwarted, may be sentenced to pay damages requirements. He must transfer the purchased thing or rights then in the way of compensation to the beneficiaries of the right of first refusal. Click Ebay for additional related pages. The Dresden State Court makes it clear that the behavior must show liability for third parties, which is not compatible with a loyal disposition of law. Only then it is justified to subject the only involved the breach of a Contracting Party of itself also a liability for damages according to the regional court of Dresden.

Comments are closed.