Germany: District Court Rules On Scope Of Legal Privilege In Germany

Last Updated: 26 July 2007

By Dr. Hans-Georg Kamann and Daniel Wiedmann

Legal privilege under German law is not a general principle. However, attorney-client communication is protected by several seizure prohibitions, their scope and applicability depending on the statutory basis of the legal proceedings leading to the seizure of such communication. The Federal Cartel Office ("FCO") can conduct investigations—and seize documents— on the basis of administrative or criminal procedure law. Regarding the latter, the Bonn district court recently defined the scope of privileged client-attorney communication, especially as far as in-house lawyers are involved. Moreover, the court held that inspections carried out by officials of the FCO due to alleged infringements of both national and European competition law will be measured by national principles alone, as long as the decision of the FCO as to which law will finally apply (or whether the case is to be referred to the European Commission ("Commission")), is still pending.

Attorney-Client Privilege and German Criminal Procedure

The investigative powers of the FCO for cases where the FCO intends to impose fines, are governed by the Administrative Offences Act (Ordnungswidrigkeitengesetz—OWiG) and the Code of Criminal Procedure (Strafprozessordnung—StPO). German criminal procedure law gives privilege to attorney-client communication in two ways:

  • either as a consequence of a lawyer’s right to refuse testimony ("attorney privilege"); or
  • as a suspected person’s entitlement to effective defense ("defense privilege").

While the first privilege requires that the lawyer is in sole possession of the documents in question, the second privilege protects only communication exchanged in close connection to the subject matter of ongoing investigations.

The Decision of the Bonn District Court

The dispute before the Bonn district court centered around documents seized by officials of the FCO—under Criminal Procedure law—in the office of the concerned undertaking’s inhouse counsel. The seizure followed investigations due to alleged discriminatory behavior under section 20 of the Act against Restraints of Competition and an investigation decision of the Commission due to alleged agreements/concerted practices prohibited under Article 81 EC Treaty. Regarding the latter, the Commission authorized the FCO to conduct inspections pursuant to Art. 20 (2) Regulation No. 1/2003.

The seized file in question contained a legal opinion of and other correspondence with outside lawyers as well as the in-house counsel’s notes regarding this correspondence and oral discussions. A part of these documents dealt with a competition law assessment of the undertaking’s dealings with customers. After the local court confirmed the seizure order, the undertaking’s counsels appealed to the district court. The Bonn district court upheld the seizure order, finding that neither seizure prohibitions under German law nor legal privilege principles under European Community law applied to the case.

Seizure Prohibitions under German Law

First, the court analyzed whether a defendant’s constitutional entitlement to effective defense, also protected under Article 6 (3) European Convention on Human Rights and Section 148 StPO, was impaired. Under this doctrine, attorney-client correspondence is protected, irrespective whether it is stored at the client’s or the attorney’s premises. However, the court noted that the scope of this concept encompasses only so-called "defense correspondence." Such correspondence must be prepared in awareness of, and directly relate to, the defense in criminal proceedings. Therefore, the court ruled that the correspondence in question did not relate to the investigations, as it was not the underlying purpose of the legal opinion and the other documents to assess and provide defense against possible legal sanctions for dealings in the past but to provide general legal advice in an ongoing business situation with a view to avoid legal sanctions.

Second, the court went on to examine whether the attorney privilege, established under criminal procedure law, applied to the case. This seizure prohibition stems from the right to refuse testimony, granted to certain professions in order to avoid self-incrimination. Accordingly it only encompasses documents which are in the sole possession of a member of such a privileged group. In-house lawyers enjoy the professional privilege only as far as they are members of the bar and they actually act as lawyers, the court held. Privilege will only extend to documents prepared by the in-house lawyer for third parties in order to present them as a lawyer. Thereby the in-house counsel must be allowed to act independently, exempted from instructions from his company. Furthermore, the documents must be in the sole possession of the in-house lawyer. Documents stored in the counsel’s office, situated on the premises of the undertaking, will be considered as also in the possession of the undertaking. Interestingly, the court noted that documents, locked in a cabinet in the in-house lawyer’s office, with no one else but him possessing the key, could be regarded as in the sole possession of the in-house lawyer. The court found that the in-house counsel in question could not be regarded as an independent lawyer nor were the documents in question in his sole possession. Accordingly, the court refused to apply the seizure prohibition.

Seizure Prohibitions under EC Law

The court went on to analyse the general framework for cooperation between the competition authorities under Council Regulation 1/2003. According to Article 22 (1) and (2) para. 2 Regulation 1/2003, investigations by competition authorities of the Member States, on behalf of the Commission, shall be conducted in accordance with their national law. The court went on to state that according to Article 12 (3) Regulation 1/2003, information exchanged between the Commission and a competition authority of a Member State may only be used as evidence if the information has been collected in a way which respects the same level of protection of the rights of defence of natural persons as provided for under the national rules of the receiving authority. Since no seizure prohibition under German rules was applicable, the court found the seizure in question was conducted in accordance with national rules and therefore also in accordance with Regulation 1/2003.

Finally, the court considered the doctrine of legal privilege, as established under EC law. Referring to the AM & S decision of the European Court of Justice ("ECJ"), the court noted that the confidentiality of written communications between a lawyer and client is subject to two conditions: first, such communications must be made for the purpose and in the interest of the client’s rights of defense; and, second, they must emanate from independent lawyers, who are not bound to the client by a relationship of employment.4 Further, the court noted that this protection not only covers communications exchanged after the initiation of the administrative procedure but extends also to earlier written communications which have a relationship to the subject matter of that procedure. Therefore, the court concluded that correspondence with in-house lawyers at present cannot be regarded privileged under EC law. The court recalled that the ECJ—due to lack of urgency—annulled an interim order of the Court of First Instance ("CFI"), which supported a different view.5 The ECJ stated that if the Commission wrongly denied legal privilege for documents, it would be prevented from using these as evidence. Otherwise, the Commission’s decision on the infringement, in so far as it was based on such evidence, would be annulled.

Nevertheless, the court noted a degree of divergence between German and European law, as far as correspondence between outside lawyers and their clients is concerned. This gap is due to the fact that German law neither generally extends protection to documents exchanged before the initiation of formal proceedings nor to documents not in the sole possession of a lawyer. Consequently, the district court acknowledged that at least the legal opinion prepared by outside legal counsel was protected under EC standards.6 But since the seizure in question aimed at the enforcement of both national and EC competition law and it was still unclear which law would finally apply, the court felt inhibited to invalidate the seizure decision by the FCO. Instead it found that in the meantime the decision would not cause any serious harm to the complainant. If, as a result of the investigations, it were decided that EC law applied, the Commission would be prevented from using this document as evidence. If it were decided that German law applied, the seizure order was valid.

Arguably, the court took the view that legal privilege does not affect the interpretation of national procedural law, despite the ECJ’s recognition of this concept as a general principle common to the laws of the Member States. Even though the court held that legal privilege under EC law does not hold the status of a European fundamental right, it should have considered whether general principles demand effective judicial protection under the effet utile.

Guidelines, as to the scope of protection of client-attorney communication under German Criminal Procedure law, derived from the court’s decision:

  • Documents held by mandated outside lawyers are generally privileged.
  • Documents held by an undertaking are only privileged if:
    • the documents are prepared after the initiation of investigations; and
    • with a view to defend the undertaking against possible sanctions as a result of these investigations,
      • Such documents should be marked accordingly.
      • Sensitive issues should be addressed verbally or through outside lawyers.
  • Additionally, documents held by in-house lawyers are only privileged if:
    • the in-house lawyer is a member of the bar;
    • the in-house lawyer is actually mandated to defend a member of his own undertaking in course of the investigations;
    • the in-house lawyer is allowed to act independently, exempted from instructions from his company; and
    • the documents are in the sole possession of the in-house lawyer (e.g., in a locked cabinet, with no one else possessing a key).
      • Such documents should be marked accordingly.

Copyright © 2007, Mayer Brown LLP and/or Mayer Brown International LLP. This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.

Mayer Brown is a combination of two limited liability partnerships: one named Mayer Brown LLP, established in Illinois, USA; and one named Mayer Brown International LLP, incorporated in England.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions