Case law references

on important decisions

in the field of cable interference law

by Johanna SCHMIDT-RÄNTSCH

In my lectures and follow-up notes, I have cited various decisions. Here you will find links to these decisions, insofar as they are freely available. The list will be completed gradually.

I. Federal Supreme Courts

1. Bundesgerichtshof (BGH -Federal Court of Justice)

BGH, judgment of 11 July 1968 – II ZR 157/65, NJW 1968, 2102: lack of awareness of declaration

BGH, judgment of 26 September 1973 – VIII ZR 106/72, BGHZ 61, 282: heat silo case – conflicting general terms and conditions, commercial letter of confirmation

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 11 March 1982 – VII ZR 357/80, BGHZ 83, 197: Slaughterhouse case, Sec. 645 BGB (German Civil Code)

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 10 December 1986 – VIII ZR 349/85, BGHZ 99, 182: NPD Case, Compensation in case non-recoverable expenses

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 30 October 1991 – VIII ZR 9/91, NJW 1992, 235: Motor yacht case – refusal to perform, Sec. 326 par. 2 BGB old version = Sec. 281 par. 2 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 7 October 1998, VIII ZR 100/97, NJW 1999, 53 f.: Assertion of the concurrent performance clause, § 320 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 26 March 1999 – V ZR 368/97, BGHZ 141, 179: Land reform case, Sec. 275 par. 1, Sec. 925 BGB, Art. 233 Sec. 11 EGBGB Law to Introduction of the German Civil Code)

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 18 October 2001 – III ZR 265/00, NJW 2002, 595: the cancelled tour, Sec. 326 par. 2 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 13 December 2001 – VII ZR 432/00, NJW 2002, 1274: house construction case, contractual penalty, performance period due to contract amendment, Sec. 286 par. 2 No. 1 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 14 November 2003 – V ZR 346/02, NJW-RR 2004, 554: replacement of parking space – limits of supplementary contract interpretation

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 20 April 2004 – X ZR 255/02, NJW-RR 2004, 1464: Expert opinion case – contract with protective effect in favour of third parties

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 2 July 2004 – V ZR 209/03, NJW-RR 2005, 205: Limits of supplementary contract interpretation

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 15 July 2004 – IX ZR 256/03, NJW 2004, 2817: Action to compel disclosure – lawyer's duty to examine

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 22 September 2004 – VIII ZR 203/03, NJW-RR 2005, 357: Second contract, Sec. 281 par. 1, 323 par. 1 and 326 par. 2 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 15 October 2004 – V ZR 100/04, WM 2004, 2443: Limitation period for the claim for transfer of ownership if the debtor has done everything necessary on his part

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 9 February 2005 – V ZR 142/04, NJW 2005, 1366: Scope of the claim for removal under Sec. 1004 par. 1 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 10 February 2005 – III ZR 258/04, NJW-RR 2005, 76: General agent case, acting in fulfilment of an obligation, Sec. 278 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 22 June 2005 – VIII ZR 281/04, BGHZ 163, 234: Sick Dachshund I – Compensation for self-performance by the buyer, Sec. 281 par. 1 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 22 June 2005 – VIII ZR 1/05, NJW 2005, 3211: Sick Dachshund II – Unreasonableness of setting a deadline, Sec. 281 par. 2 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 20 July 2005 – VIII ZR 275/04, BGHZ 163, 381: Reimbursement of expenses also in the case of commercial use, Sec. 284 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 30 May 2008 – V ZR 184/07, NJW 2008, 3122: Supermarket case II, Sec. 1004, 275 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 18 July 2008 - V ZR 171/07, NJW 2008, 3123: Cinema case, Sec. 1004, 275, 254 par. 1 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 25 September 2008 – VII ZR 35/07, NJW 2009, 217: Construction progress report case, contract with protective effect in favour of third parties, sec. 328 BGB analogously

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 10 October 2008 – V ZR 131/07, BGHZ 178, 182: Burden case – impossibility under Sec. 346 par. 2 sentence 1 no. 2 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 19 November 2008 – VIII ZR 311/07, BGHZ 178, 355: Driving lessons in exchange for a horse – calculation of compensation for loss of value – Sec. 346 par. 2 sentence 2 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 16 January 2009 – V ZR 133/08, BGHZ 179, 238: Building permit case – Liability for asserting unjustified claims

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 20 January 2009 – X ZR 45/07, NJW-RR 2009, 667: Concrete cutting – necessity of setting a deadline, refusal of subsequent performance due to dispute in court proceedings

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 28 May 2009 – Xa ZR 113/08, NJW 2009, 2743: Flight cancellation as a fixed-date transaction, Sec. 275 par. 1 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 5 June 2009 – V ZR 168/08, NJW 2009, 3155: Transfer of ownership as restitution, Sec. 346 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 19 June 2009 – V ZR 93/08, BGHZ 181, 317: Office building case, consequential damage, eligibility for compensation under Sec. 280 par. 1 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 12 August 2009 – VIII ZR 254/08, NJW 2009, 3153: Immediately as setting a deadline, Sec. 281 par. 1, 323 par. 1 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 9 October 2009 – V ZR 178/08, NJW 2010, 363: Overpriced – burden of proof under Sec. 138 par. 1 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 16 October 2009 – V ZR 203/08, NJW 2010, 146: Unusual construction work, Sec. 323 par. 5 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 30 October 2009 – V ZR 42/09, NJW 2010, 1074: Easement – prohibition of assignment, Sec. 399 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 12 March 2010 – V ZR 147/09, NJW 2010, 1805: Damp common property – deadline set in cases of fraudulent intent, Sec. 323 par.2 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 14 April 2010 – VIII ZR 145/09, NJW 2010, 2426: Motor vehicle dealer's duty to inspect, Sec. 276 par. 2 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 21 May 2010 – V ZR 244/09, NJW 2010, 2341: Fertiliser case, Sec. 1004, 275 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 10 June 2010 – V ZR 85/09, NJW 2010, 2873: Binding period I – Extension of the period specified in Sec. 147 par. 2 BGB by general terms and conditions

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 5 November 2010 – V ZR 228/09, NJW 2011, 1217: Catalogue error case – Damages instead of performance in the event of failure to reduce the price

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 13 January 2011 – III ZR 87/10, BGHZ 188, 71: Life coaching – Derogation from Sec. 326 par. 1 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 27 May 2011 – V ZR 122/10, NJW 2011, 2953: Basement case – Relationship between reduction and damages in lieu of performance

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 30 September 2011 – V ZR 17/11, BGHZ 191, 139: Refusal to adjust pursuant to Sec. 313 par. 1 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, decision of 17 November 2011 – V ZB 58/11, NJW 2012, 530: Right of use case – enforceability of the judgment pursuant to Sec. 894 ZPO (Code of Civil Procedure)

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 19 December 2012 – VIII ZR 96/12, NJW 2013, 1074: Boat case, Sec. 437, 439, 275 BGB

Federal Court Justice, judgment of 12 April 2013 – V ZR 266/11, NJW 2013, 2182: Lack of building permit – deadline set in case of fraudulent intent, Sec. 323 par. 2 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 14 June 2013 – V ZR 108/12, NJW 2013, 2888: Stolen collector's coins – limits of Sec. 935 par. 2 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 3 July 2013 – VIII ZR 169/12, NJW 2013, 2959: Biodiesel case – replacement costs as compensation in lieu of performance

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 13 December 2013 – V ZR 58/13, BGHZ 199, 227: Stolen vehicle – loss in the event of loss of co-ownership

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 17 June 2014 – VI ZR 281/13, NJW 2014, 2493: Fault against oneself Sec. 276 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 19 January 2018 – V ZR 273/16, DNotZ 2018, 686: Duty of loyalty Sec. § 241 par. 2 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 9 February 2018 – V ZR 299/14, ZfIR 2018, 686: Effect of land register correction Sec. 894 BGB

Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 13 October 2023 – V ZR 161/22, NJW-RR 2024, 288: Limitation period for the claim for transfer of ownership if the debtor has done everything necessary on his part (II)

II. Imperial Court (RG – Reichsgericht)

RG, judgment of 24 November 1916 – II.392/1916, RGZ 89, 123: Rosshals case – calculation of the grace period, Sec. 326 BGB (old version)

III. Higher Regional Courts

Higher Regional Court of Saarbrücken, judgment of 14 December 1966 – 1 U 105/66, OLGZ 1967, 1, 9: Retention of title, acquisition in the case of unsecured possession

Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court, judgment of 13 June 1996 – 18 U 174/95, NJW-RR 1997, 930: Scheduled flight as a fixed-date transaction, Sec. 275 par. 1 BGB

Cologne Higher Regional Court, judgment of 26 January 2001 – 6 U 160/00, NJOZ 2001, 971: Periodical case – sending of unsolicited goods, Sec. 241a BGB

Schleswig Higher Regional Court, judgment of 3 July 2003 – 7 U 240/01, NJW 2004, 231: Order hotline case – distance selling contract and PostIdent procedure, Sec. 312b BGB

Stuttgart Higher Regional Court, judgment of 1 February 2006 – 3 U 106/05, ZGS 2008, 479: New car case – relationship between damages in lieu of performance and reduction, Sec. 325 BGB analogously

Saarbrücken Higher Regional Court, judgment of 15 May 2008 – 8 U 119/07, MDR 2008, 1268: Construction progress declaration – contract with protective effect vis-à-vis third parties

IV. Regional and local courts

1. Regional courts

Gießen Regional Court, judgment of 4 June 2003 – 1 S 413/02, NJW-RR 2003, 1206: Switch case – conclusion of contract on the Internet – Sec. 150 par. 2 BGB

Rottweil Regional Court, judgment of 30 June 2003 – 3 O 24/03, NJW 2003, 3139: Kitchen case – Sec. 275 par. 1, 133, 157 BGB

IV. Foreign courts

Court of Appeal (London), judgment of 11 August 1903 – Krell v. Henry [1903] 2 K. B. 740: Foundation of the Contract, Section 313 BGB

Austrian Supreme Court, judgment of 24 May 2005 – 1Ob14/05y, SZ 2005, 82: Noise – minor defect, Sec. 932 par. 4 ABGB corresponding Sec. 323 par. 5 sentence 2, Sec. 281 par. 1 sentence 3 BGB

V. Arbitration tribunals

Frankfurt/Main Superior Stage Arbitration Court, decision of 21 March 1994 – BOSchG 12/94, NJW 1995, 903: Responsibility and occupational safety, Sec. 275 par. 3, 326 par. 2 BGB.

Kind regards

Johanna Schmidt-Räntsch

Enquiries to: Johanna@Schmidt-Raentsch.eu. Thank you.

As of 29^th October 2025