Definition and Significance of the Cause of Action
The cause of action is a central concept in civil procedural law and refers to the actual set of facts on which the plaintiff bases a lawsuit and from which the plaintiff derives their claims. The cause of action forms the basis for the subject matter of the dispute as well as for the court’s competence to make a decision. It includes those facts that are essential to the validity of the claim.
A precise presentation of the cause of action is of considerable importance in the statement of claim, because it decisively determines the scope and subject of judicial proceedings. The cause of action is clearly distinguished from the claim itself, which relates to the desired legal consequence (for example, payment of a sum of money or surrender of an object).
Legal Classification of the Cause of Action
Cause of Action and Subject Matter of the Dispute
The cause of action is closely linked to the subject matter of a lawsuit. The subject matter, regulated in German civil procedure law under Section 253 (2) No. 2 ZPO, consists of the claim and the underlying set of facts—i.e., the cause of action. Typically, the subject matter results from a combination of these two elements.
Distinguishing between several causes of action is particularly important when a plaintiff asserts multiple claims based on different facts. Each legal basis for a claim with its own cause of action may constitute a separate subject matter, meaning each must be decided on individually.
Function in Civil Procedure
In civil proceedings, the cause of action serves to define the scope of the respective legal claim. Only the facts fully set out as part of the cause of action may be examined by the court and, if necessary, form the basis of a decision. Limiting the review to the facts put forward in the cause of action is intended to prevent the court from adjudicating claims that are not pleaded or properly substantiated.
Especially in cases involving an amendment or expansion of the claim, it is crucial to determine whether a new or modified cause of action is being put forward, as this affects the admissibility of procedural applications and any proposed changes.
Distinction Between the Cause of Action and Other Legal Concepts
Difference Between Cause of Action and Basis of Claim
Whereas the cause of action refers to the set of facts—the actual events on which the plaintiff’s request is based—the basis of claim primarily refers to the legal norm granting the plaintiff the asserted claim. The same set of facts (cause of action) may support different legal bases (statutes or provisions). For judicial examination, both the cause of action and the correct basis of claim are relevant.
Cause of Action and Claim
The claim specifies the decision requested from the court (e.g. payment, transfer, declaration). In contrast, the cause of action discloses the facts from which the plaintiff derives the request. A cause of action may therefore be the basis for various claims, provided they arise from the same set of facts.
Cause of Action and Procedural Particularities
Principle of Specificity
According to Section 253 (2) No. 2 ZPO, the plaintiff is obligated to present the cause of action in the statement of claim with sufficient specificity such that the subject matter is clearly defined. The facts that form part of the cause of action must be listed in such a concrete and comprehensible manner that both the court and the defendant can identify the grounds underpinning the claim.
If the factual presentation of the cause of action is insufficiently specific, there is a risk that the claim will be dismissed as inadmissible for lack of substantiation. The principle of specificity protects the defendant from unexpected and unforeseeable expansions of the claim.
Amendment and Expansion of the Claim
According to Section 263 ZPO, an amendment of the claim generally occurs when the subject matter of the dispute—and accordingly, the cause of action—is wholly or partially substituted, supplemented, or replaced. An expansion of the claim is generally permissible if the court and the defendants consent or if it is expedient. The decisive factor in assessing this is the extent to which the underlying cause of action changes.
Especially when it comes to so-called contingent or auxiliary claims, the examination of multiple causes of action may be required. Any amendment to the claim must meet the specificity requirements regarding the new cause of action.
Cause of Action in Relation to Specific Types of Proceedings
Civil Procedure
In civil procedure, the cause of action expressly determines the nature and scope of the claim to be examined by the court. The cause of action is also of central importance in declaratory, performance, and formative actions, as the formulation of the cause of action decisively shapes the court’s determination of admissibility and merits.
Administrative and Criminal Procedure
The cause of action is also important in administrative proceedings (Section 82 of the Rules of Administrative Court Procedure) as well as in criminal procedure (Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure), although with different terminology and substantive requirements. In administrative disputes, reference is often made to the “subject matter of the dispute”, and in criminal proceedings, for example, to the “charge”. In every case, the cause of action serves to delineate the subject matter of the process and enable a legally sound decision.
Significance of the Cause of Action for Res Judicata and Preclusion
Another key aspect of the cause of action is its significance for the binding effect of judicial decisions. The substantive binding effect (res judicata) of a judgment generally extends only to claims based on the same cause of action. If a particular claim is decided with final legal effect on the basis of a specific cause of action, a renewed assertion of the same claim on the same basis is precluded (keyword: preclusion).
Summary
In German procedural law, the cause of action is one of the most important concepts for structuring and distinguishing proceedings. Its precise presentation determines the scope of the judicial procedure, affects its admissibility, and has a direct impact on the binding force of court decisions. Distinctions from related concepts, such as basis of claim or claim itself, are essential for the legal progress and effectiveness of a lawsuit. The cause of action ensures legal certainty, transparency, and protection for both claimants and defendants.
Frequently Asked Questions
What role does the cause of action play in determining the subject matter of the dispute in civil procedure?
The cause of action is crucial for determining the subject matter of the dispute in civil procedure. The subject matter consists of the claim and the corresponding facts of the case—the cause of action. Only by clearly establishing the cause of action does it become apparent which specific factual event the plaintiff’s request is based on. The court can only decide on claims that arise from the stated cause of action; any overreaching judgment would be inadmissible. For this reason, the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) allows changes to the claim only within strict limits, for instance, when the subject matter is significantly altered by amending or expanding the cause of action. An imprecisely presented cause of action may result in the court dismissing the claim as inadmissible or making evidentiary proceedings impossible.
What is the significance of the cause of action for the effect of res judicata?
The cause of action is decisive for the substantive binding effect (res judicata) of a judgment, because this generally relates to the set of facts presented with the cause of action. If a claim has been the subject of a final judgment, the binding effect extends only to claims based on the same cause of action. If the cause of action changes substantially, new claims may be asserted in a subsequent proceeding without being subject to res judicata. This close connection is intended, on the one hand, to avoid double pursuit of the same claim, while on the other hand allowing for the renewed assertion of claims arising from different sets of facts.
Can multiple causes of action be combined in one lawsuit?
Yes, it is possible to combine several causes of action within a single lawsuit. According to the Code of Civil Procedure, a plaintiff may bring cumulative or alternative claims, meaning that different sets of facts are subject to legal review. The prerequisite is that all causes of action are stated specifically and can be distinguished from one another. In practice, this either results in an objective accumulation of claims or alternative obligations, with the court being required to rule on various legal bases for the claims. The highest requirements are placed on substantiation, making a precise presentation of each individual cause of action necessary.
What are the requirements for presenting the cause of action in the statement of claim?
The statement of claim must set out the cause of action precisely and completely. The plaintiff is required to present the entire set of facts on which the claim is based in a well-reasoned and specific manner. General or vague statements are not sufficient; rather, it must be made clear which specific facts exist, when and under what circumstances they occurred, and how they establish the claim. An inadequate statement of the cause of action may cause the lawsuit to appear unfounded at an early stage, potentially resulting in its dismissal. This primarily serves to ensure a lawful and transparent procedure and to safeguard the opposing party’s right to be heard.
To what extent can the cause of action change during the course of the proceedings?
Modification of the cause of action during ongoing proceedings is only permissible under the conditions laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure—especially Sections 263 and 264 ZPO. According to prevailing legal opinion, there is an amendment of the claim if the underlying set of facts changes. Such modifications may, by way of exception, be allowed with the defendant’s consent or when expedient by the court. However, a mere extension or specification within the same cause of action is permissible, as long as a new basis of claim is not created. The decisive criterion is always whether the substance of the dispute is being replaced in essential respects or whether the same basic set of facts remains decisive.
What special features apply to the cause of action in administrative and criminal proceedings?
In administrative and criminal proceedings, there are special features concerning the cause of action. While in civil proceedings the cause of action must be clearly defined, in administrative proceedings (“action for annulment”) the specific subject matter is often determined by the contested administrative act. Here, the focus is less on the plaintiff’s free submissions and more on the content of the administrative act. In criminal proceedings, although the term cause of action is not explicitly used, the procedural offence within the meaning of Section 264 StPO corresponds to the cause of action. It defines the actual set of facts underlying the indictment and also marks the limit of the court’s decision-making authority. Even here, an extension is only possible under strict conditions.
