Abstract
This chapter provides an overview on how Private International Law (PIL) may be made useful for the purposes of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) under German Law.
After briefly glancing at the institutional framework of CSR in Germany (“Definition and Sources”), we analyse which rules of the substantive law may be used to protect CSR considerations (“Characterisation”). To this end, we take a closer look at company law, contract law and the law of tort. Within the company law, extending the duty of legality (Legalitätspflicht), piercing the corporate veil (Durchgriffshaftung) or using the newly introduced sections 289b and 289c of the German Commercial Code (HGB) may be options for enforcing CSR-rules. It would, however, be preferable to recognise a duty of care of the parent company within the law of tort, i.e. recognise its tortious responsibility across the value chain.
We summarise alternative methods of dispute resolution within CSR cases (“Alternative methods of dispute resolution”). The subsequent chapters evaluate under which circumstances German courts will have jurisdiction to decide CSR cases (“Jurisdiction”) as well as which law will be applicable in relation to company structure (lex societatis), contract law and the law of tort (“Applicable law”). Within the law of tort, we suggest that victims of human rights violations should be able to choose the law applicable to their case under the Rome II regulation. In the final chapter, we outline the requirements for recognising and enforcing foreign judgments (“Recognition and enforcement of judgments”).
The answers provided in the following questionnaire are primarily based on Weller et al. (2016), p. 387. Additional information was drawn from Thomale and Hübner (2017), p. 285; Weller and Thomale (2017), p. 509.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
http://www.csr-in-deutschland.de/EN/What-is-CSR/Background/Sustainability-and-CSR/sustainability-and-csr-article.html, cf. for further information (in German only) Wissenschaftliche Dienste des Deutschen Bundestages, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) – Aktueller Stand in Deutschland, 2016, https://www.bundestag.de/blob/424954/76374d447099012620a493400ba0001c/wd-5-032-16-pdf-data.pdf.
- 2.
COM(2011) 681, 25 October 2011, p. 5, 6: “The Commission has identified a number of factors that will help to further increase the impact of its CSR policy, including: […] The need to acknowledge the role that complementary regulation plays in creating an environment more conducive to enterprises voluntarily meeting their social responsibility.”
- 3.
COM(2001)366, 18 July 2001, p. 6.
- 4.
Cf. particularly the Resolution of the National CSR-Forum from 28 April 2009 on a common understanding of CSR in Germany: “Corporate Social Responsiblity (CSR) bezeichnet die Wahrnehmung gesellschaftlicher Verantwortung durch Unternehmen über gesetzliche Anforderungen hinaus. CSR steht für eine nachhaltige Unternehmensführung im Kerngeschäft, die in der Geschäftsstrategie des Unternehmens verankert ist. CSR ist freiwillig, aber nicht beliebig.” (http://www.bmas.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/PDF-Publikationen/a397-csr-empfehlungsbericht.pdf?__blob=publicationFile). The national CSR-Forum was founded by the Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Responsibility in 2009. 41 experts from the private sector, trade unions, NGOs, academia and representatives of Federal Ministries meet on a biannual basis to discuss and advise the Federal Government on the development of its CSR Strategy. For further information, cf. http://www.csr-in-deutschland.de/EN/Policies/CSR-national/National-CSR-Forum/national-csr-forum-article.html.
- 5.
Directive 2013/34/EU of 26 June 2013, as amended by Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014.
- 6.
Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of 17 May 2017 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 laying down supply chain due diligence obligations for Union importers of tin, tantalum and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas; cf. Heße and Klimke (2017), pp. 446 ff.
- 7.
Spießhofer (2016), §11, para. 5–6.
- 8.
Ibid., para. 5.
- 9.
- 10.
https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/M-O/organisationsplan-bmwi.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3 and National Contact Point Reporting Questionnaire, 2016, p. 3, http://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/nks-jahresbericht-2016.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=5.
- 11.
This information has generously been provided to the authors on their request by the German NCP.
- 12.
https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/DE/Artikel/Aussenwirtschaft/oecd-leitsaetze-nationale-kontaktstelle.html. Until 2016, budgetary issues were decided on an ad hoc basis, cf. National Contact Point Reporting Questionnaire, 2016, pp. 5–6; http://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/nks-jahresbericht-2016.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=5.
- 13.
This information has generously been provided to the authors on their request by the German NCP. Equally, Wissenschaftliche Dienste des Deutschen Bundestages, Struktur und Arbeitsweise der Nationalen Kontaktstellen für die OECD-Leitsätze für multinationale Unternehmen, WD 2 - 3000 - 206/14 vom 17. November 2014, p. 6, https://www.bundestag.de/blob/412818/30fc974f3b637f16993fe821de4313f4/wd-2-206-14-pdf-data.pdf.
- 14.
National Contact Point, Joint final statement by the German National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational enterprises (NCP), UNI Global Union (UNI) and International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) and Deutsche Post DHL (DP- DHL) on the complaint by UNI/ITF against DP-DHL/Bonn, 2014, access at http://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/oecd-ac-final-statement-itf-dhl.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1.
- 15.
National Contact Point, Final Statement by the German National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises regarding a complaint by Uwe Kekeritz, Member of the German Bundestag, against KiK Textilien und Non-Food GmbH, C&A Mode GmbH & Co., and Karl Rieker GmbH & Co. KG, access at http://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/oecd-ac-final-statement-kik.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1.
- 16.
National Contact Point, Final statement by the German National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on a complaint by European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), Reporters without borders, Bahrain Center for Human Rights, Bahrain Watch, and Privacy International against trovicor GmbH, Munich about violations of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, 21 May 2014, access at https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/oecd-ac-final-statement-ecchr.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1.
- 17.
National Contact Point, Joint statement by the German National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on a complaint by Indocement Union, SP-ITP, the Federation of Indonesian Cement Industry (FSP-ISI), by the Confederation of Indonesian Trade Unions (CITU-KSPI) and by IndustriALL Global Union against PT Indocement Tunggal Prakarsa, Indonesia and HeidelbergCement AG, Germany, 21 May 2014, access at http://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/oecd-ac-final-statement-nks-indonesien.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1.
- 18.
National Contact Point, Final statement by the German National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on a complaint by Mr. Dominic Whiting against NORDEX SE, 31 August 2016, access at http://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/abschlusserklaerung-nks-dominic-whiting-gegen-nordex-se.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2.
- 19.
National Contact Point, Final statement by the German National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises relating to a complaint by Industriegewerkschaft Metall (IG Metall) against Hyundai Motor Europe Technical Center GmbH (HMETC) in Rüsselsheim, Germany, access at http://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/oecd-ac-final-statement-hyundai.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1.
- 20.
National Contact Point, Final declaration of the German National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises in response to a complaint against Audi AG for violating the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, 21 October 2014, access at http://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/oecd-ac-final-statement-audi.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2.
- 21.
National Contact Points, Final statement by the German National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises on a complaint by Metro Habib Employee Union, Karachi Pakistan (on behalf of the employees of METRO Habib Cash & Carry Pakistan) against METRO Cash & Carry about violations of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, 21 May 2014, access at http://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/oecd-ac-final-statement-metro.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1.
- 22.
National Contact Point, Final statement by the German National Contact Point for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterpriseson a complaint by Mr. Yogesh KN against Robert Bosch GmbH and Bosch Limited (India), 29 May 2017, access at http://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/abschlusserklaerung-nks-yogesh-kn-gegen-robert-bosch-gmbh.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1.
- 23.
The National Action Plan (only in German) is available at http://www.csr-in-deutschland.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/NAP/nap-im-original.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2.
- 24.
For further information (available in German only): http://www.csr-in-deutschland.de/DE/Wirtschaft-Menschenrechte/Ueber-den-NAP/Ziele-des-NAP/ziele-des-nap.html.
- 25.
Sorgfaltspflichtengesetz, available at: https://die-korrespondenten.de/fileadmin/user_upload/die-korrespondenten.de/SorgfaltGesetzentwurf.pdf.
- 26.
For further information, please refer to the homepage of the German Foreign Office, available at: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/de/aussenpolitik/themen/aussenwirtschaft/wirtschaft-und-menschenrechte/monitoring-nap/2124010.
- 27.
- 28.
LG München I, 10.12.2013 - 5 HK O 1387/10.
- 29.
- 30.
- 31.
LG München I, 10.12.2013 - 5 HK O 1387/10.
- 32.
Hübner (2018a), p. 72 et ff.
- 33.
- 34.
A number of scholars promote transferring this school of thought from the sphere of economics into the law, such as, within the English literature, Hansmann and Kraakman (1991), pp. 1879 et seq; Stone (1980), p. 1; Siliciano (1987), pp. 1834 et seq. Or, within the German literature, Thomale (2018); Bitter (2000), pp. 181 et seq, 200 et seq; Meyer (2000), pp. 1031 et seq.
- 35.
For further detail on the tortious liability stemming from CSR breaches cf. Question 2.3.
- 36.
I.e. cases in which it is impossible for an obligee to differentiate between the assets of the company and that of the shareholders. This may be caused by obscure bookkeeping or other factors. As a result, assets of the company are unduly attributed to the shareholders or other companies within the group.
- 37.
I.e. cases in which the shareholders, in reversal of the general rule, are accountable for the insolvency of the company. It, in essence, requires an improper withdrawal of company assets without compensation that causes or aggravates the company’s insolvency. Cf. BGH, Urteil vom 16. Juli 2007 - II ZR 3/04.
- 38.
Weller et al. (2016), pp. 407–409.
- 39.
- 40.
There is, as of yet, no official translation of these sections of the Commercial Code. Therefore, we took the liberty of translating the relevant provisions ourselves. Anything within square brackets has been added by the authors for easier understanding of the provisions and is not part of the official text. Square brackets have also been used to indicate omissions from the original text.
s. 289b of the Commercial Code:
(1) A capital company must include in its management report [according to ss. 264, 289 of the Commercial Code] a non-financial statement, if it exhibits the following characteristics:
-
1.
the capital company fulfils the requirements of s. 267 para. 3 sen. 1 [i.e. is a large capital company within the meaning of that provision],
-
2.
the capital company is capital market oriented [kapitalmarktorientiert within the meaning s. 264d of the Commercial Code] and
-
3.
the capital company has had on average more than 500 employees during the financial year. […].
s. 289c of the Commercial Code:
(1) In the non-financial statement within the meaning of s. 289b, the capital company must elaborate shortly on its business model.
(2) The non-financial statement must furthermore include at least the following aspects:
-
1.
environmental issues [...],
-
2.
employee matters, [...] including information on, for example, measures taken to ensure gender equality, […] the respect for the rights of employees to be informed and consulted, [...] the respect for the rights of trade unions [...],
-
3.
social matters [...],
-
4.
the respect for human rights, including information on, for example, the avoidance of human rights violations, and
-
5.
the combat against corruption and bribery [...].
[...]
(4) If a capital company does not pursue a concept in relation to one or more of the aspects named in paragraph 2, it must explicitly declare and elaborate on this in its non-financial statement [...].
For the official text of these provisions (in German only) cf. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/hgb/BJNR002190897.html#BJNR002190897BJNG000300300.
-
1.
- 41.
Gesetz vom 11.4.2017 (BGBl. I S. 802).
- 42.
Directive 2013/34/EU of 26 June 2013, as amended by Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014.
- 43.
- 44.
- 45.
Cf. particularly s. 331 (1) no. 1 of the Commercial Code (in official translation):
A prison sentence of up to three years or a fine will be imposed on someone who
-
1.
as a member of the body authorised to represent the company or as a member of the supervisory board of a capital company gives a false account of or obscures the situation of the capital company […] in the management report, including the non-financial statement, [or] in the separate non-financial statement […].
Cf. furthermore s. 334 (1) no. 3 of the Commercial Code (in official translation):
A regulatory offence is committed by someone who as a member of the body authorised to represent the company or as a member of the supervisory board of a capital company […]
-
1.
when preparing the management report or a separate non-financial statement breaches one of the provisions of ss. 289 to 289b (1), ss. 289c […].
For the official text of these provisions (in German only) cf. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/hgb/BJNR002190897.html#BJNR002190897BJNG000300300.
-
1.
- 46.
- 47.
Reserved in this context, Thomale and Hübner (2017).
- 48.
This differentiation is based on Art. 1137, 1147 of the French Code Civil of 1804. The German academic discussion on civil obligations has adopted this differentiation, cf. Mansel (2014), § 241, para. 9.
- 49.
Equally, Roth-Mingram (2015), pp. 1343 et seq.
- 50.
According to s. 76 (4), the management board must set targets as to the number of women in its top-management to be reached by a certain date.
- 51.
- 52.
Drygala (2015), § 111, para. 67 et seq.
- 53.
- 54.
Di Fabio (2016), para. 101. But even before the implementation of the German Basic Law—the German Civil Code is older than the Basic Law, particularly within the law on contracts—, the idea of autonomous parties shaped the German Civil Code. It was drafted in an environment of economic liberalism. Thus, the original document almost entirely refrained from monitoring contractual content, safe for the limits imposed by s. 134 (breach of statute—Gesetzesverstoß), s. 138 (unconscionability—Sittenwidrigkeit) and s. 242 (performance in good faith—Leistung nach Treu und Glauben). Over time, this has changed, particularly under the influence of EU law which introduced a multitude of clauses on the protection of weaker parties, for example consumers, leading to an, at times, far-reaching review of private-law contracts. Cf. in detail Säcker (2015), para. 33 et seq; Busche (2015), para. 5-7; Emmerich (2016), para. 1 et seq.
- 55.
Köhler (2016), para. 23 et seq.
- 56.
Cf. in particular s. 108e, s. 299 and ss. 332-336 Criminal Code, Art. 2 IntBestG and Art. 1 EUBestG.
- 57.
Cf. in particular s. 130 (1), (3) in combination with ss. 9, 29a and 30 of the Act on Regulatory Offences.
- 58.
Cf. inter alia, United Nations Convention against Corruption of 31 Oktober 2003, ratified by the German Bundestag on 27 Oktober 2014 (BGBl. 2014 II S. 762, 763).
- 59.
BGH NJW 1985, 2406; Ellenberger (2016), § 138 BGB Rn 43.
- 60.
Janke (2015), p. 248.
- 61.
Ibid.
- 62.
- 63.
S. 434 Civil Code (official translation):
(1) The thing is free from material defects if, upon the passing of the risk, the thing has the agreed quality. To the extent that the quality has not been agreed, the thing is free of material defects […]
2. if it is suitable for the customary use and its quality is usual in things of the same kind and the buyer may expect this quality in view of the type of the thing.
Quality under sentence 2 no. 2 above includes characteristics which the buyer can expect from the public statements on specific characteristics of the thing that are made by the seller, the producer (section 4 (1) and (2) of the Product Liability Act [Produkthaftungsgesetz]) or his assistant, including without limitation in advertising or in identification, unless the seller was not aware of the statement and also had no duty to be aware of it, or at the time when the contract was entered into it had been corrected in a manner of equal value, or it did not influence the decision to purchase the thing.
s. 437 Civil Code (official translation):
If the thing is defective, the buyer may, provided the requirements of the following provisions are met and unless otherwise specified,
1. under section 439, demand cure,
2. revoke the agreement under sections 440, 323 and 326 (5) or reduce the purchase price under section 441, and
3. under sections 440, 280, 281, 283 and 311a, demand damages, or under section 284, demand reimbursement of futile expenditure.
The full text of these sections may be found at https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/englisch_bgb.html#p0726.
- 64.
Weller et al. (2016), pp. 398–399.
- 65.
Safe for contracts protecting third parties (Verträge mit Schutzwirkung zugunsten Dritter): Under certain circumstances, parties not involved in the agreement may claim protection under the agreement (cf. instead of many BGH NJW 1995, 92). Only breaches of contractual duties of care (Schutzpflicht) may be invoked—not breaches of the primary duty of performance (Leistungspflicht). For a third party to be protected under a contract in such a way, the following requirements must be met: (1) There must be a (not necessarily effective) contractual relationship between two parties (Schuldverhältnis), (2) the third party must come into contact with the risks arising from breaches of duties of care in the same way as the obligee (Leistungsnähe), (3) there must be a relationship of proximity between the obligee and the third party (Gläubigerinteresse), (4) both requirements (2) and (3) must be apparent to the obligor (Erkennbarkeit für den Schuldner), and (5) the third party must be in need of protection (Schutzbedürfnis), i.e. the third party must not have own comparable contractual claims against the obligor. Hereto in more detail, cf. Jauernig and Stadler (2016), § 328, para. 19 et seq.
- 66.
S. 823 Civil Code (official translation):
(1) A person who, intentionally or negligently, unlawfully injures the life, body, health, freedom, property or another right of another person is liable to make compensation to the other party for the damage arising from this.
Accessible at: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/englisch_bgb.html#p0726.
- 67.
- 68.
- 69.
At first, it may appear that human rights fit into the category developed by the courts for the protection of the so-called general right of personality (Allgemeines Persönlichkeitsrecht), cf. inter alia BGHZ 13, 334 (Leserbrief) and BGHZ 26, 349 (Herrenreiter). This right has, so far, primarily served to protect the free development of one’s own personality (freie Entfaltung der Persönlichkeit) or the protection and preservation of one’s personal space (Gewährleistung der engeren persönlichen Lebenssphäre und der Erhaltung ihrer Grundbedingungen), cf. BVerfG NJW 2008, 39, para. 75; BVerfG NJW 2006, 207, para. 25; BVerfG NJW 1980, 2070, para. 13. As such, the Allgemeine Persönlichkeitsrecht shows some overlaps with the human rights protection but does not per se cover human rights in their full scope.
- 70.
- 71.
Weller and Thomale (2017), pp. 509, 515 et seq.
- 72.
Weller et al. (2016), p. 400.
- 73.
Ibid.
- 74.
Weller and Thomale (2017), pp. 509, 515 et seq.
- 75.
Hager (2009), § 823, E 25.
- 76.
- 77.
The question of duties of care applying across legal subjects is to be differentiated from the cases where someone has already created a danger, delegated its control onto a third party and the selection or supervision of that third party was deficient (Delegationsfälle). In those cases, liability is imposed on the basis that a party may not free itself from its responsibilities and duties by delegating them onto a third party without ensuring that that third party will take the appropriate measures to prevent harm to others. Cf. Schaub (2014), § 823, para. 129; Teichmann (2014), § 823, para. 33, 36.
- 78.
- 79.
- 80.
In more detail Weller and Thomale (2017), pp. 509, 520 et seq.
- 81.
- 82.
Bergmann (2015).
- 83.
S. 831 Civil Code (official translation):
(1) A person who uses another person to perform a task is liable to make compensation for the damage that the other unlawfully inflicts on a third party when carrying out the task. Liability in damages does not apply if the principal exercises reasonable care when selecting the person deployed and, to the extent that he is to procure devices or equipment or to manage the business activity, in the procurement or management, or if the damage would have occurred even if this care had been exercised.
(2) The same responsibility is borne by a person who assumes the performance of one of the transactions specified in subsection (1) sentence 2 for the principal by contract.
Accessible at: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/englisch_bgb.html#p0726.
- 84.
- 85.
Ibid., pp. 417 et seq.
- 86.
S. 278a Code of Civil Procedure (official translation):
(1) The court may suggest that the parties pursue mediation or other alternative conflict resolution procedures.
(2) Should the parties to the dispute decide to pursue mediation or other alternative conflict resolution procedures, the court shall order the proceedings stayed.
Accessible at http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_zpo/englisch_zpo.html#p1021.
- 87.
Cf. hereto in more detail Bacher (2017), § 278a, para. 1; Foerste (2017), § 278a, para. 1 et seq; Ulrici (2016), § 278a, para. 1 et seq.
- 88.
Accessible at http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/zpoeg/15a.html, available only in German.
- 89.
Hereto in more detail Prütting (2016), § 278, para. 57 et seq.
- 90.
Official translation available at http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_zpo/englisch_zpo.html#p1021. Hereto in more detail Prütting (2016), § 278, para. 9 et seq.
- 91.
Brussels Ia-Regulation is another term for the Council Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.
- 92.
Stürner (2015), p. 844.
- 93.
ECJ Case 281/02 Owusu v Jackson [2005] ECLI:EU:C:2005:120, paras. 36 et seq.
- 94.
LG Dortmund, Urteil vom 10.01.2019 - 7 O 95/15.
- 95.
- 96.
LG Dortmund, Urteil vom 10.01.2019 - 7 O 95/15.
- 97.
https://germanwatch.org/de/13837, Pressemitteilung vom 12.05.2017.
- 98.
LG Essen, Urteil vom 15.12.2016 - 2 O 285/15.
- 99.
OLG Hamm, Beschluss vom 30.11.2017 - I-5 U 15/17.
- 100.
Ibid.
- 101.
Joseph (2004), p. 101.
- 102.
https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/nike-lawsuit-kasky-v-nike-re-denial-of-labour-abuses-0?page=4 (last retrieved: 23/12/2019).
- 103.
- 104.
Osieka (2014), p. 221.
- 105.
BGH NJW 1957, 1433 (1434)—translated by the authors.
- 106.
- 107.
Weller (2017), p. 167.
- 108.
BGH NJW 2009, 289, para. 21 et seq (Trabrennbahn); Weller (2015), para. 338 et seq.
- 109.
BGHZ 97, 272. In more detail on the determination of this ‘real seat’ cf. Weller (2015), para. 321 et seq, with further references.
- 110.
v. Bar and Mankowski (1991), para. 621.
- 111.
Gesell (2013), para. 2.3.
- 112.
Weller (2015), para. 350.
- 113.
Ibid., para. 340.
- 114.
Ibid., para. 341.
- 115.
Ibid., para. 333, with further references.
- 116.
Study on the Law Applicable to Companies—Final report, 2016, accessible at https://bookshop.europa.eu/en/study-on-the-law-applicable-to-companies-pbDS0216330/.
- 117.
Groupe européen de droit international privé (GEDIP), Draft rules on the law applicable to companies and other bodies (accessible at http://www.gedip-egpil.eu/documents/Milan%202016/GEDIPs%20Proposal%20on%20Companies.pdf).
- 118.
GEDIP (2016), p. 23: «Nonobstant l´article 3, les questions liées à la responsabilité sociétale des entreprises, à partir du moment où elles affectent l´organisation de la société, sont soumises à la loi la plus protectrice soit du siège social statutaire, soit de l´incorporation, soit du siège social réel, soit des activités de la société.»
- 119.
Ibid., p. 23.
- 120.
Cf. also Art. 4 para. 1 Rome I.
- 121.
Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II).
- 122.
Thorn (2016); Art. 4 Rom-I-VO.
- 123.
Cf. Recital no. 18 to Regulation (EC) No 864/2007.
- 124.
Spickhoff (2013); VO (EG) 864/2007 Art. 4, para. 1.
- 125.
Junker (2015), Rom II-VO Art. 4, para. 3; similarly, already BGH NJW 1983, 1972 (1973).
- 126.
Weller and Thomale (2017), pp. 509, 523 et seq.
- 127.
See above at question 2.3.
- 128.
Thomale and Hübner (2017), p. 392.
- 129.
Cf. hereto in further detail questions 20 and 21.
- 130.
Art. 6 Introductory Act to the Civil Code (official translation):
A provision of the law of another country shall not be applied where its application would lead to a result which is manifestly incompatible with the fundamental principles of German law. In particular, inapplicability ensues, if its application would be incompatible with civil rights.
Accessible at https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgbeg/englisch_bgbeg.html#p0038.
- 131.
Art. 21 Regulation (EC) No 593/2008:
The application of a provision of the law of any country specified by this Regulation may be refused only if such application is manifestly incompatible with the public policy (ordre public) of the forum.
Accessible at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32008R0593&from=EN.
- 132.
Art. 26 Regulation (EC) No 864/2007:
The application of a provision of the law of any country specified by this Regulation may be refused only if such application is manifestly incompatible with the public policy (ordre public) of the forum.
Accessible at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32007R0864&from=DE.
- 133.
BGH IPrax 2001, 586 (587); Schulze (2015), para. 14.
- 134.
- 135.
Art. 59 para. 2 Basic Law (official translation):
Treaties that regulate the political relations of the Federation or relate to subjects of federal legislation shall require the consent or participation, in the form of a federal law, of the bodies responsible in such a case for the enactment of federal law […].
Accessible at https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.html#p0141.
- 136.
Art. 25 Basic Law (official translation):
The general rules of international law shall be an integral part of federal law. They shall take precedence over the laws and directly create rights and duties for the inhabitants of the federal territory.
Accessible at https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.html#p0141.
- 137.
Stürner (2017), para. 246.
- 138.
Ibid., para. 247.
- 139.
S. 328 Code of Civil Procedure (official translation):
-
(1)
Recognition of a judgment handed down by a foreign court shall be ruled out if:
-
1.
The courts of the state to which the foreign court belongs do not have jurisdiction according to German law;
-
2.
The defendant, who has not entered an appearance in the proceedings and who takes recourse to this fact, has not duly been served the document by which the proceedings were initiated, or not in such time to allow him to defend himself;
-
3.
The judgment is incompatible with a judgment delivered in Germany, or with an earlier judgment handed down abroad that is to be recognised, or if the proceedings on which such judgment is based are incompatible with proceedings that have become pending earlier in Germany;
-
4.
The recognition of the judgment would lead to a result that is obviously incompatible with essential principles of German law, and in particular if the recognition is not compatible with fundamental rights;
-
5.
Reciprocity has not been granted.
-
1.
-
(2)
The rule set out in number 5 does not contravene the judgment’s being recognised if the judgment concerns a non-pecuniary claim and if, according to the laws of Germany, no place of jurisdiction was established in Germany.
Accessible at http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_zpo/englisch_zpo.html#p2455.
-
(1)
- 140.
Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and oft he Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (recast), [2012] O.J. L 351/1.
- 141.
Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, [2007] O.J. L 339/3.
- 142.
- 143.
Junker (2016), pp. 343–344.
- 144.
- 145.
Stadler (2017), § 328, para. 5.
- 146.
- 147.
Prevailing opinion, cf. Gottwald (2016), § 328, para. 66 with further references.
- 148.
s. 18 Courts Constitution Act (official translation):
The members of the diplomatic missions established in the territory of application of this Act, the members of their families and their private servants shall be exempt from German jurisdiction […].
Accessible at https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gvg/englisch_gvg.html#p0040.
- 149.
Dörner (2017), § 328, para. 20.
- 150.
Gottwald (2016), § 328, para. 116.
- 151.
Bach (2017), § 328, para. 10.
- 152.
Kropholler (2006), § 60 V 1b.
- 153.
Cf. inter alia BGH NJW 1992, 3096 (3098); OLG Hamm, Beschluss vom 30.11.2017 - I-5 U 15/17; Stadler (2017), § 328, para. 2 with further references.
- 154.
Procedures initiated before 10 January 2015 are subject to the Art. 33 et seq. Brussels Regulation 2001.
- 155.
S. 722 Code of Civil Procedure (official translation):
(1) Compulsory enforcement may be pursued under the judgment of a foreign court if such compulsory enforcement is ruled admissible by a judgment for enforcement.
(2) That local court (Amtsgericht, AG) or regional court (Landgericht, LG) shall be competent for entering the judgment on the complaint filed for such judgment with which the debtor has his general venue, and in all other cases, that local court or regional court shall be competent with which a complaint may be filed against the debtor pursuant to section 23.
s. 723 Code of Civil Procedure (official translation):
(1) The judgment for enforcement is to be delivered without a review being performed of the decision’s legality.
(2) The judgment for enforcement is to be delivered only once the judgment handed down by the foreign court has attained legal validity pursuant to the laws applicable to that court. The judgment for enforcement is not to be delivered if the recognition of the judgment is ruled out pursuant to section 328.
Accessible at http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_zpo/englisch_zpo.html#p2455.
- 156.
Gottwald (2016), § 722, para. 1 et seq.
- 157.
Ibid., § 723, para. 2.
References
Bach I (2017) ZPO. In: Vorwerk V, Wolf C (eds) Beck’scher Online-Kommentar, ZPO, Stand: 15.6.2017. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 328–329, 355–372a, 722–723
Bacher K (2017) ZPO. In: Vorwerk V, Wolf C (eds) Beck’scher Online-Kommentar, ZPO, Stand: 15.6.2017. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 253 – 299a, 321a
Bachmann G (2014) Anmerkung zum Urteil des LG München I vom 10.12.2013 - 5 HK o 1387/10 - Zur Haftung des Vorstands für Mängel des Compliance-Systems. ZIP:579–583
Bar C (1996) Gemeineuropäisches Deliktsrecht Band 1. C.H.Beck, München
Bar C, Mankowski P (1991) Internationales Privatrecht Band 2. C.H.Beck, München
Bergmann J (2015) Menschenrechte. In: Handlexikon der Europäischen Union, 5th edn. Nomos, Baden-Baden
Bitter G (2000) Konzernrechtliche Durchgriffshaftung. Heymanns C, Köln
Böcking H-J, Gros M, Rabenhorst D (2016) Handelsgesetzbuch. In: EBJS, 37th edn. C.H.Beck, München
Busche J (2015) BGB. In: Münchener Kommentar zum BGB, 7th edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 133, 139–157 BGB
Dauner-Lieb B (2016) AktG. In: Hennsler M, Strohn L (eds) Gesellschaftsrecht, 3rd edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 76–94
Di Fabio U (2016) In: Maunz T, Dürig G (eds) Grundgesetz Kommentar, 79 EL. C.H.Beck, München. Art. 2
Dörner H (2017) In: Saenger I (ed) ZPO, 14th edn. Nomos, Baden-Baden. § 328, EuGVVO, EuEheVO, IntFamRVG, EuUnthVO, AUG
Drygala T (2015) In: Schmidt K, Lutter M (eds) AktG. Otto Schmidt, Köln. §§ 41, 95–116 und 171–176
Ellenberger J (2016) In: Palandt O (ed) BGB, 75th edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 1–240, EGBGB Art. 229 §§ 6, 12, 23, 24, 31, AGG §§ 1–5, 31, 32
Emmerich V (2016) BGB. In: Münchener Kommentar zum BGB, 7th edn. C.H.Beck, München. § 311
Fleischer H (2014) Aktienrechtliche Compliance-Pflichten im Praxistest: Das Siemens/Neubürger-Urteil des LG München. NZG:321–329
Fleischer H (2017) Corporate social responsibility. AG 2017, 509–525
Fleischer H (2019) In: Spindler G, Stilz E (eds) Kommentar zum Aktiengesetz, 4th edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 76–94
Foerste U (2017) In: Musielak H-J, Voit W (eds) ZPO, 14th edn. Franz Vahlen, München. §§ 108–113, 253–287
Gesell H (2013) Gesellschaftsrechtliche Umsetzung grenzüberschreitender Umwandlungen. In: Prinz U (ed) Umwandlungen im Internationalen Steuerrecht. Otto Schmidt, Köln
Gottwald P (2016) ZPO. In: Münchener Kommentar zur ZPO, 5th edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 322–328
Grusic U (2015) Responsibility in groups of companies and the future of international human rights and environmental litigation. CLJ 74:30–34
Hager J (2009) In: Staudinger J (ed) BGB. De Gruyter, Berlin. §§ 823–825
Hansmann H, Kraakman R (1991) Toward unlimited shareholder liability for corporate torts. Yale Law J 100:1879–1934
Harbarth S, Brechtel M (2016) Rechtliche Anforderungen an eine pflichtgemäße Compliance-Organisation im Wandel der Zeit. ZIP:241–251
Hauschka CE, Moosmayer K, Lösler T (2016) Corporate compliance, 3rd edn. C.H.Beck, München
Heider K (2008) In: Münchener Kommentar zum AktG, 3rd edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 1–14
Hein J (2015) BGB. In: Münchener Kommentar zum BGB, 6th edn. C.H.Beck, München. Art. 6 EGBGB
Hennings A (2009) Über das Verhältnis von multinationalen Unternehmen zu Menschenrechten. Universitätsverlag Göttingen, Göttingen. https://doi.org/10.17875/gup2009-181
Heße D, Klimke R (2017) Die EU-Verordnung zu Konfliktmineralien: Ein stumpfes Schwert? EuZW 28:446–450
Hommelhoff P (2015a) CSR-Vorstands- und –Aufsichtsratspflichten. NZG:1329–1336
Hommelhoff P (2015b) Nichtfinanzielle Ziele in Unternehmen von öffentlichem Interesse. In: Bork R, Kayser G, Kebekus F (eds) Festschrift Kübler B. C.H.Beck, München
Hübner L (2018a) Human rights compliance und Haftung im Außenverhältnis. In: Krajewski M, Müller-Hoff C (eds) Die Durchsetzung menschenrechtlicher Sorgfaltspflichten von Unternehmen. Nomos, Baden-Baden
Hübner L (2018b) Eine Rom-VO für das Internationale Gesellschaftsrecht – zugleich ein Beitrag zur Kohärenz im Internationalen Gesellschaftsrecht. ZGR:149–185
Janke S (2015) In: Walden D, Depping A (eds) CSR und nachhaltige Korruptionsprävention. Springer, München
Joseph S (2004) Corporations and transnational human rights litigation. Bloomsbury Publishing, London
Junker A (2015) BGB. In: Münchener Kommentar zum BGB, 6th edn. C.H.Beck, München. Rom II-VO Art. 4
Junker A (2016) Internationales Zivilprozessrecht, 3rd edn. C.H.Beck, München
Köhler H (2016) BGB Allgemeiner Teil, 40th edn. C.H.Beck, München
Kötz H, Wagner G (2013) Deliktsrecht, 12th edn. Vahlen, München
Kropholler J (2006) IPR, 6th edn. Mohr Siebeck, Heidelberg
Mansel P (2014) In: Jauernig O (ed) BGB, 15th edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 1–242, 516–534, 598–651, 652–675 b, 677–704, 1297–1921, AGG §§ 1–22, 31–33.
Medicus D (1998) Deliktische Außenhaftung der Vorstandsmitglieder und Geschäftsführer. ZGR:570–585
Merkt H (2016) In: Baumbach A, Hopt K (eds) Kommentar zum Handelsgesetzbuch, 37th edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 238–342e
Meyer J (2000) Haftungbeschränkung im Recht der Handelsgesellschaften. Springer, München
Mühlhens J (2006) Der sogenannte Haftungsdurchgriff im deutschen und englischen Recht. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen
Osieka G (2014) Zivilrechtliche Haftung deutscher Unternehmen für menschenrechtsbeeinträchtigende Handlungen ihrer Zulieferer. Peter Lang, Bern
Petrin M (2013) Assumption of responsibility in corporate groups. Mod Law Rev: 603
Paefgen W (2016) “Compliance” als gesellschaftsrechtliche Organpflicht? WM:433–444
Prütting H (2016) ZPO. In: Münchener Kommentar zur ZPO, 5th edn. C.H.Beck, München
Roth-Mingram B (2015) Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) durch eine Ausweitung der nichtfinanziellen Informationen von Unternehmen. NZG:1341–1344
Säcker F (2015) In: Münchener Kommentar zum BGB, 7th edn. C.H.Beck, München, Einleitung BGB
Sanger A (2012) Crossing the corporate veil: The duty of care owed by a parent company to the employees of its subsidary. Camb Law J 71(3):478–481
Schaub R (2014) BGB. In: Prütting H, Wegen G, Weinreich G (eds) Kommentar BGB, 9th edn. Luchterhand, München
Schön W (2016) Der Zweck der Aktiengesellschaft – geprägt durch europäisches Gesellschaftsrecht. ZHR 180:279–288
Schulze G (2015) In: Hüßtege R, Mansel H-P (eds) Rom-Verordnungen, 2nd edn. Nomos, Baden-Baden
Seibt H, Cziupka J (2014) 20 Thesen zur Compliance-Verantwortung im System der Organhaftung aus Anlass des Siemens/Neubürger-Urteils. DB:1598–1602
Siliciano J (1987) Corporate behavior and the social efficiency of tort law. Michigan Law Rev:1820–1864
Spickhoff A (2013) BGB. In: Bamberger G, Roth H, Hau W (eds) Beck’scher Online-Kommentar, Stand: 01.02.2013. C.H.Beck, München. Art.4
Spießhofer B (2016) Compliance and corporate social responsibility. In: Hauschka C, Moosmayer K, Lösler T (eds) Corporate compliance, 3rd edn. C.H.Beck, München
Spindler G (2014) AktG. In: Münchener Kommentar zum AktG, 4th edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 76–96, 117 AktG
Stadler A (2016) In: Jauernig O (ed) BGB, 16th edn. C.H.Beck, München
Stadler A (2017) In: Musielak H-J, Voit W (eds) ZPO, 14th edn. Franz Vahlen, München. §§ 128–165, 214–229, 239–252, 328, 330–347, 355–370, 1072–1075, Vorb. z. Europäischen Zivilprozessrecht, EuGVVO, EuZustVO
Stone C (1980) The place of enterprise liability in the control of corporate conduct. Yale Law J 90:1149–1192
Stürner M (2015) Die Rolle des Kollisionsrechts bei der Durchsetzung von Menschenrechten. In: Hilbig-Lugani K, Jakob D, Mäsch G, Reuß P, Schmid C (eds) Festschrift Coester-Waltjen D. Gieseking, Bielefeld
Stürner M (2017) BGB. In: Gsell B, Krüger W, Lorenz S, Reymann C (eds) Beck’scher Online-Grosskommentar zum BGB, Stand: 01.05.2017. C.H.Beck, München. Art. 6 EGBGB
Teichmann A (2014) In: Jauernig O (ed) BGB, 15th edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 249–255, 535–597, 651a–651m, 823–853
Thomale C (2018) Kapital als Verantwortung. ACP 218:685–688
Thomale C, Hübner L (2017) Zivilgerichtliche Durchsetzung transnationaler Unternehmensverantwortung. JZ:385–397
Thorn K (2016) In: Palandt O (ed) BGB, 75th edn. C.H.Beck, München. EGBGB Art. 3–48 mit Rom I-, Rom II- und Rom III-Verordnung sowie Güterrechtsverordnungen, Haager Unterhaltsprotokoll und Erbrechtsverordnung (teilweise), Art. 220, 229 § 28
Tonner K (2012) BGB. In: Münchener Kommentar zum BGB, 6th edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§651a–Nach §651m
Ulrici B (2016) ZPO. In: Münchener Kommentar zur ZPO, 5th edn. C.H.Beck, München. § 278a ZPO
Wagner G (2013) BGB. In: Münchener Kommentar zum BGB, 6th edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 823–838
Wagner G (2016) Haftung für Menschenrechtsverletzungen. RabelsZ 80:717–782
Weller M-P (2013) Fehlerhafte Kapitalmarktinformation zwischen Freiheit und Haftung. In: Festschrift für Michael Hoffmann-Becking zum 70. Geburtstag. C.H.Beck, München
Weller M-P (2015) GmbHG. In: Münchener Kommentar zum GmbHG, 2nd edn. C.H.Beck, München. §§ 14, 15, 18 GmbHG, Einleitung Internationales Gesellschaftsrecht
Weller M-P (2017) Das autonome Unternehmenskollisionsrecht. IPRax:167–178
Weller M-P, Thomale C (2017) Menschenrechtsklagen gegen deutsche Unternehmen. ZGR:509–526
Weller M-P, Kaller L, Schulz A (2016) Haftung deutscher unternehmen für Menschenrechtsverletzungen im Ausland. ACP 216:387–420
Wilhelmi R (2015) In: Ziemons H, Jaeger C (eds) Beck’scher Online-Kommentar GmbHG, Stand: 15.08.2015. C.H. Beck, München. §§ 13–18
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Weller, MP., Hübner, L., Kaller, L. (2020). Germany. In: Kessedjian, C., Cantú Rivera, H. (eds) Private International Law Aspects of Corporate Social Responsibility. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 42. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35187-8_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35187-8_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-35186-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-35187-8
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)