Decision of the OLG Naumburg on the use of gender-neutral language in court rulings
On July 21, 2023, the Higher Regional Court (OLG) Naumburg issued a decision (Az.: 1 ORbs 133/23) addressing the question of whether so-called gendering – i.e., the use of special characters like the gender asterisk – is permissible in the context of using gender-neutral language in judicial decisions. The issue of linguistic design in court rulings was discussed, particularly regarding neutrality and comprehensibility.
Background of the procedure
In the underlying case, a decision with gender-neutral formulations, such as using the so-called gender asterisk like “Beteiligte*r,” was challenged as part of an appeal process. The appellant claimed that such writing styles could violate both linguistic conventions of jurisprudence and the principle of legal certainty.
Reasoning of the OLG Naumburg
The OLG Naumburg made it clear that judicial decisions must feature clear, legally precise, and understandable language for all parties involved. The court found that the use of new, unofficial language characters like gender asterisks, colons, or similar constructions is generally not compatible with the required legal certainty and readability of judgments.
Requirements for judicial reasoning
Judicial decisions are subject to a special obligation for clarity and unambiguity. The OLG emphasized that the formulations in judgments serve particularly to clearly outline to all parties involved and third parties how the court reached its conclusion. The introduction of writing styles that deviate from official German spelling could impair both the understanding and acceptance of the reasons for the decision.
The OLG further explained that there is no legal basis allowing systematic deviation from current spelling rules in official texts like judgments. Therefore, the use of the gender asterisk cannot occur without a specific occasion and outside existing regulations.
Impacts on judicial practice
The decision clarifies that courts are required to follow the guidelines of official German spelling. Unexamined or creative deviations – such as in the form of gender-fair language characters – are inadmissible in the formal drafting of decisions. The OLG Naumburg noted that this serves to ensure clarity, norm clarity, and legal peace.
Whether and to what extent future adjustments to relevant regulations are conceivable remains to be seen in current and future legislative processes. As of now, there is a clear line regarding the inadmissibility of such writing styles in rulings and resolutions.
Ongoing relevance
The principles of this decision remain crucial for the practice of drafting judicial decisions as long as there are no other directives. The procedure is complete; however, it continues to be discussed among legal experts to what extent a development of spelling rules and language practice might eventually be incorporated into official documents. It remains to be seen whether a broader change in writing usage in authorities and courts will occur.
Further background on the decision can be found at urteile.news.
Individual legal issues
The precise handling of language in judgments and other official texts can be of significant importance for companies as well as for individuals. For further questions regarding the maintenance of legal certainty and the design of judicial proceedings, MTR Legal Attorneys are available for issues in the field of litigation.
