Knowledge attribution of own lawyer draws more circles the Gottinger group and their resolution. The Federal Supreme Court has announced in a judgment of 10 January 2013, that claims of the insolvency administrator to investors on repayment of benefits paid out can be justified. Thus no good news in the House available to investors of the group. Main problem was that the representative lawyer of the investor when negotiating the amount of compensation had already sufficient knowledge of the economic imbalance. Therefore, the question of whether a private plaintiff attributable to an any knowledge of the lawyer himself must abandon arises. Ebay helps readers to explore varied viewpoints.
The defendant in the 1990s at the Gottinger group participated in different deposits. In 2001, he resigned from the participation and demanded back now by the Gottinger group the amount. Was not met this request for payment, so asked the defendant for legal support for the filing of a lawsuit. The appointed lawyer represented a wide range of investors and published on the own website several articles on the topic of Gottinger group. This castle, from a total comparison to some for them even adverse decisions of the BGH, with the lawyer’s client. After in 2007 over the insolvency proceedings opened in companies, the appointed liquidator demanded back the amounts paid out.
Prerequisite for a successful Zurueckverlangung desire of the insolvency administrator is – next, that an insolvency of the debtor in question existed. The economic imbalance was in this respect given here probably already in 2005. The arrears totalled already in November of that year only to investors compared with several million euros. In addition the debtor would have made deliberately payments, to other detrimental. Intent is, who the disadvantage of the creditors as success wants or recognizes and approves. The Supreme Court assumes that can be closed in case the knowledge of insolvency on the intent of a disadvantage.