Joinder

A joinder of parties - also called subjective complaint accumulation - is present when in a dispute either plaintiff or defendant side several people are involved. For number of plaintiffs is called active joinder of parties, regarding several parties of passive joinder.

  • 2.1 Simple joinder 2.1.1 Material joinder
  • 2.1.2 Formal joinder
  • 2.1.3 differences
  • 2.2.1 claim Hardcover joinder
  • 2.2.2 Effect Hardcover joinder
  • 2.2.3 effects

German law

The joinder may arise in three different ways: on the one already at the time of this action, namely when multiple parties sue or be sued, and by extension the party and finally by connecting several independent processes. It ends by discontinuance, settlement of a litigation ratio or by splitting into separate processes.

We distinguish:

Simple joinder

The simple joinder is the rule. It is given when several independent se processes are summarized from expediency to a procedure. According to § 59, § 60 ZPO § 260 ZPO analog and several people can then act together or be sued if:

  • They stand in relation to the matter in dispute in the legal community ( § 59 1 Alt. ZPO), or if they are entitled or obliged from the same factual and legal grounds ( § 59 2nd alternative. ZPO)
  • Their rights or obligations are similar and on a substantially similar factual and legal basis based ( § 60 ZPO)
  • The trial court is responsible for all claims and all claims asserted in the same type of process ( § 260 ZPO analog).

In simple joinder of parties, the parties be available as individual against ( § 61 ZPO). Each process action must therefore be assessed separately for each process legal relationship, because the parties be able to neither advantage nor to the disadvantage of the other joint parties act. However, presentation of facts and evidence footing of a fellow soldier are also attributable to the other, if the parties put forward to the contrary.

Necessary joinder of parties

Can be only uniform the decision to all parties be from process or substantive reasons, assigns § 62 para 1 CCP the necessary joinder of parties to.

Process Legal reasons are:

  • Legal force extension ( eg § 183 Insolvency Act, § 248 AktG, § 326, § 327, § 856, paragraph 4 ZPO)
  • If the judgment against all parties be design effect (for instance a complaint in accordance with § 133 HGB)

When joinder procedurally necessary all joined parties can sue or be sued alone. Only then, when in fact the armed comrades act together unfolds § 62 ZPO its effect. If the action with respect to an individual parties be inadmissible, they will only be dismissed by sub-process judgment as inadmissible. Because § 62 ZPO requires only a single decision on the merits.

Substantive reasons are given:

  • If the action may be brought only jointly because only common powers of disposal or must be directed at all (eg, active processes of the overall hand; conveyance action of several co-owners )

The joinder of substantive law required the joined parties can not sue or be sued alone as opposed to procedurally necessary joinder of parties. This would mean the inadmissibility of the action. Accordingly, the inadmissibility of the whole action is also given if the application is inadmissible only in terms of a single fellow soldier. Acknowledgment, waiver and amended complaint must be explained jointly by all present joined parties.

The procedural acts of the armed comrades act in the necessary joinder continue only for and against the single party (the principle applicable § 61 ZPO § 62 ZPO but largely fail). But can be closely configured as, for example, the defaulting party may be represented by the necessary parties be so issued against this no default judgment ( § 62 para 1 CCP ) - The relationships are - in contrast to the simple joinder of parties.

Do not confuse the dispute is contemporary with the intervenors, who is a party to a civil action is not itself.

The civil procedure rules are acc. § 64 Code of Administrative Procedure, § 74 SGG, § 59 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the FGO fellow soldier administrative, social or financial legal proceedings.

Austrian law

Depending on whether as against the other is possible at an individual parties be another judgment, a distinction is made between simple joinder of parties and uniform party to the dispute.

Simple joinder

Here, the individual armed comrades their respective litigation independent of each other, connected only by the common process. Accordingly, different judgments for or against a single armed comrades are possible.

The simple joinder of parties is the process economics by parallelism of parallel processes are avoided.

There are several situations in which a simple joinder may result in:

Material joinder

  • Legal community (eg ownership )
  • Authorization / obligation of the same factual basis (eg, several injured from the same event)
  • Solidary authorization / obligation

Formal joinder

This form is available if 'the like, based on a substantially similar actual reason, rights or obligations " are the subject of the dispute ( § 11Vorlage: § / Maintenance / RIS Find paragraph 2 ZPO). Examples: Several workers complain the common employer on salary payment; a common landlord is suing several tenants on payment of interest.

Differences

The material joinder creates (according to § 93Vorlage: § / Maintenance / RIS Search Section 1 JN ) a shared jurisdiction, the formal joinder requires a common jurisdiction.

In the formal and created from solidary ties substantive joinder are the values ​​in dispute (pursuant to § 55Vorlage: § / Maintenance / RIS search JN ) are not aggregated.

Uniform party to the dispute

In the case of a single party to the dispute, also known as " bound joinder ", there will be a uniform process with a uniform process output. The result is a judgment that applies for and against all concerned.

Again, there are different constellations:

Claim Hardcover joinder

In a challenging joinder bound the asserted claim is designed so that it can be enforced jointly by or against all joined parties.

This can be justified that the matter in dispute is identical (eg prosecutor raises annulment because of a " citizenship marriage" ) or that the parties be of the claim can only come together or that there is a common law relationship, the only can be determined uniformly for or against all joined parties.

In each case, only a single process is conceivable separate processes, as they are feasible with simple joinder of parties, would be inexpedient.

A challenging joinder bound is a "necessary joinder of parties ". Are not all material authorized / obligated parties be represented, lacking the kind of legitimacy and the action is dismissed.

Effect Hardcover joinder

In an effective bound Streigenossenschaft the effects of the judgment extend to persons who were not involved in the process.

This can occur at quite formative judgments ( eg cancellation of a contract ), or if an extension of the law to force other people is arranged by law.

Effects

Regarding the process of debt collection activities ( process acts relating to the formal end of the process, such as adjournment motions ) applies: the actions of a fellow soldier also acts for others.

To counteract the consequences of default representation principle applies: the actions of a fellow soldier turns consequences of default.

Otherwise, a dispute comrade can not dispose at the expense of the other: For comparison, admission or waiver of the rule of unanimity prevails.

If there are conflicting dispositions of the armed comrades, the favourability principle applies: The best of the single party to the dispute process action, so to speak, the "smallest common denominator " is relevant.

Cause of action
609786
de