Concept and definition of the follow-up appeal (Anschlussrevision)
Die Follow-up appeal (Anschlussrevision) is a procedural legal institution anchored in German civil procedure law, which enables a party involved in the appeal process to join an appeal lodged by the other party. It constitutes an independent legal remedy that is linked to the principal appeal and is only admissible in connection with it. The follow-up appeal is regulated in Section 554 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO). Its main purpose is to allow a party, after the expiry of the period for filing an independent appeal, to assert certain objections, thereby ensuring an efficient use of the appellate process.
Legal basis
Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO)
The relevant provisions for the follow-up appeal are found in Section 554 ZPO. They apply primarily in appellate proceedings before the Federal Court of Justice. In administrative, fiscal, and social court proceedings, as well as in labor court procedures, there are analogous legal institutions with corresponding regulations.
Nature and purpose
The follow-up appeal serves to create a balance of interests between the litigating parties when, after the expiry of the appeal period, one party is compelled to have the judgment reviewed due to an appeal by the opposing party. As the joining party may have relied, within the ordinary appeal period, on a waiver of legal remedies or on the judgment’s having final and binding force, the institution of the follow-up appeal grants additional legal protection.
Procedural requirements for the follow-up appeal
1. Dependence on a principal appeal
The follow-up appeal is an accessory legal remedy. It is only admissible if an appeal has previously been properly filed by at least one party within the prescribed form and time limit. If the principal appeal is withdrawn or found inadmissible, the admissibility of the follow-up appeal also lapses.
2. Capacity to be a party
Any party involved in the appeal proceedings who has an interest related to the appeal itself is entitled to file a follow-up appeal. This particularly includes the plaintiff and defendant, as well as third-party intervenors, provided they are adversely affected by the judgment.
3. Form and deadline
The follow-up appeal must be filed in the same form as the principal appeal, namely by submitting a specific, properly reasoned brief to the Federal Court of Justice. The deadline for filing is two months from service of the grounds for the principal appeal (Section 554(2) ZPO). An independent appeal after expiry of the appeal period is generally no longer possible.
4. Scope of the follow-up appeal
The follow-up appeal can be directed against parts of the judgment that were not challenged by the primary legal remedy. To this extent, the subject matter of the dispute in the appellate proceedings can be expanded through the follow-up appeal. However, the party is limited to its own (partial) objections; mere defense against the other party’s appeal can also be achieved by responding to the appeal rather than through a follow-up appeal.
Distinction from other legal remedies
a) Independent appeal
In contrast to the independent appeal, the follow-up appeal is dependent on the admissibility and continued existence of the principal appeal. It cannot exist independently of it and thus has an accessory effect.
b) Conditional appeal (Anschlussberufung)
As a parallel institution, a conditional appeal (Anschlussberufung) may be lodged in appeal proceedings (§ 524 ZPO). The structure and requirements of both remedies are similar, but they are applied at different procedural stages.
Effects and legal consequences of the follow-up appeal
1. Binding effect
The follow-up appeal shares the legal fate of the principal appeal. If the principal appeal is withdrawn or dismissed as inadmissible, the effectiveness of the follow-up appeal is likewise generally affected. The only exception is if the principal appeal is rejected due to expiration of the time limit, and the follow-up appeal was itself filed on time.
2. Decision-making authority of the appellate court
In the case of an admissible follow-up appeal, the court must review the subject matter of the dispute covered by both legal remedies as a whole and—if one of the grounds of appeal is valid—set aside or amend the contested judgment to that extent.
3. Cost consequences
As with other legal remedies, in the case of (follow-up) appeals, the costs of the entire proceedings are to be decided jointly. If only the follow-up appeal is successful, this may affect the cost ratio.
Practical relevance and examples of application
The follow-up appeal is frequently used in cases where both parties are dissatisfied with parts of a second-instance judgment but, for tactical reasons, have initially refrained from lodging their own legal remedy. Especially in situations with an unclear legal position or during settlement negotiations, the follow-up appeal can serve as a ‘safeguard’ for one’s own right to appeal if the opposing party acts.
Literature and further regulations
- Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), particularly § 554
- Commentary on the ZPO (e.g., Thomas/Putzo, Zöller, or Musielak)
- Federal Court of Justice (BGH): consistent case law on the follow-up appeal
Note: The follow-up appeal is a central component of German appellate law in civil proceedings and ensures a flexible and efficient handling of appeals in the interest of both parties. It makes a significant contribution to balancing interests and ensuring procedural justice, even after the expiry of the original periods for legal remedies.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the legal requirements for a follow-up appeal?
Several legal requirements must be observed for the admissibility of a follow-up appeal. Firstly, a follow-up appeal presupposes that a principal appeal has been validly lodged, as it is accessory and cannot be pursued independently without it. The period for lodging the follow-up appeal is not determined by a statutory standard period, but by the time of service of the principal appeal’s statement of grounds (§ 554(2) ZPO). A follow-up appeal is only possible within the period in which a reply to the appeal can also be submitted, usually within one month after service of the statement of grounds. Furthermore, the follow-up appeal is generally limited to the same decision that is also challenged by the principal appeal, which is why the subject matter of the dispute must be observed. The follow-up appeal must also be filed in due form, in writing, and by a representative authorized to appear before the court (as a rule, a Rechtsanwalt before the civil panels of the BGH).
Can a follow-up appeal be withdrawn and what are the consequences?
The follow-up appeal may be validly withdrawn. Pursuant to § 565 ZPO, the same provisions apply to the withdrawal of the follow-up appeal as to the withdrawal of the principal appeal. Withdrawal is generally possible until the announcement of the appeal decision. Upon withdrawal, the particular appeal instance is deemed not to have been initiated, as a result of which the contested judgment becomes final in this respect and the follow-up appeal is no longer subject to review by the appellate court. The costs are in this case to be distributed at the court’s equitable discretion, as a rule to be borne by the party who withdrew the follow-up appeal (§ 516 para. 3 ZPO in conjunction with § 565 ZPO).
To what extent is the scope of review of the court limited in the case of a follow-up appeal?
The scope of the court’s review in the case of a follow-up appeal is legally limited to the subject matter of the follow-up appeal. The appellate court thus only examines the legal errors asserted within the scope of the follow-up appeal as set out in the follow-up brief. In accordance with § 557(1) ZPO, however, it must also be observed that, as regards the outcome of the judgment, the court must not go beyond the extent of the main appeal. That means, in principle, no decision may be made in favor of the appellant of the follow-up appeal if the principal appeal is rejected; in that case, the follow-up appeal is to be regarded as moot.
What is the effect of the inadmissibility of the principal appeal on the follow-up appeal?
A key legal peculiarity of the follow-up appeal is that its admissibility as an accessory legal remedy is tied to the fate of the principal appeal. If the principal appeal is dismissed as inadmissible, the follow-up appeal is also inadmissible, even if, taken on its own, it would have been admissible. This results from the principle of accessoriness, meaning the follow-up appeal shares the fate of the principal appeal (§ 554 para. 2 sentence 6 ZPO, analogously).
Can a follow-up appeal be based on new grounds of attack or defense?
Legally, it is generally not permitted in appellate proceedings to introduce new grounds of attack or defense, as the appellate court is bound by the submissions to the lower courts (§ 559 ZPO). This prohibition of novelties also applies to the follow-up appeal. Only those facts and means of evidence that have already been presented and became the subject of the appeal judgment may be brought forward. New factual submissions are not admissible either with the principal or with the follow-up appeal. However, this does not include new legal arguments or new legal assessments of facts already submitted.
How does the follow-up appeal relate to the independent lodging of an appeal?
Legally, a party affected by the opposing party’s appeal can choose whether to file an appeal themselves or to proceed by means of a follow-up appeal. The follow-up appeal offers the particular advantage that it is possible even after the period for lodging an appeal has expired, as long as the period for replying to the appeal is still running. However, this flexibility is tied to the condition that a principal appeal has actually been filed. If this is not the case or the principal appeal is withdrawn, the independent appeal is preferable, as only it can be conducted independently. The follow-up appeal can—if admissible—later be converted into an independent appeal if an independent appeal is still filed within the deadline.
