Joinder of actions: Definition, legal basis, and practical significance
Definition of joinder of actions
Joinder of actions is a term from civil procedure law and refers to the bringing together of several legally independent subject matters of dispute within a single statement of claim and a unified court proceeding. The aim of joinder of actions is to achieve procedural efficiency by bundling multiple claims before the court so they can be heard and decided together.
Types of joinder of actions
Objective joinder of actions
Objective joinder of actions occurs when one party asserts several, independent subject matters of dispute against the same defendant in one claim (§ 260 ZPO). These may include, for example, payment claims, claims for restitution, or declaratory applications, which are combined in one statement of claim.
Requirements for objective joinder of actions
In order for objective joinder of actions to be permissible, the following requirements must be met:
- Same parties: The plaintiff and defendant must be the same for all claims.
- Jurisdiction of the court: The court must have subject-matter and territorial jurisdiction for all subject matters (§ 260 ZPO).
- Same type of proceedings: The claims must generally be enforceable through the same type of procedure.
- Permissibility of joint hearing and decision: The subject matters of dispute may be heard and decided together so long as there are no statutory obstacles.
Subjective joinder of actions
Subjective joinder of actions, also referred to as joinder of parties, extends the concept of joinder of actions to several parties. Here, several persons either bring or face claims jointly in one proceeding, whether the claims are similar or different, and must assert them or have them asserted against them within the same proceeding.
Statutory regulations on subjective joinder of actions
- Simple joinder of parties (§ 59 ZPO): This is present if multiple parties act as plaintiffs or defendants together by operation of law, by joint rights, or due to factual or legal connections.
- Necessary joinder of parties (§ 62 ZPO): In certain cases, the judgment can only be rendered uniformly for or against all parties involved.
Distinction from consolidation of actions and counterclaim
It is important to distinguish joinder of actions from consolidation of actions as well as from counterclaims:
- Consolidation of actions: Several independent actions are not brought together at the outset, but only at a later stage, for example by consolidation ordered by the court (§ 147 ZPO).
- Counterclaim: A counterclaim is a claim brought by the defendant against the plaintiff within the same proceeding.
Procedural effects of joinder of actions
Procedural economy and division of proceedings
By means of joinder of actions, both time and cost expenditures are reduced, as there is no need to conduct a separate process for each claim. Generally, the court may hear all subject matters together and issue a single judgment. However, if procedural obstacles arise for a particular subject matter (for example, inadmissibility or lack of merit), a division of proceedings (severance) pursuant to § 145 ZPO is possible.
Determination of litigation value in joinder of actions
The amount in dispute in a joinder of actions is determined by adding the individual amounts in dispute of the asserted claims (§ 5 ZPO). The total amount is especially significant for court and attorney fees.
Res judicata and partial judgment
Each partial judgment on one of several subject matters achieves res judicata with respect to that subject matter, regardless of the decisions on any remaining pending claims.
Joinder of actions in German civil procedure law
The central provision for objective joinder of actions is found in § 260 ZPO. This allows multiple procedural claims to be combined in one suit if they are directed against the same defendant and are to be decided by the same court in the same proceeding.
Judicial authority to sever and consolidate (severance)
Pursuant to §§ 145 ff. ZPO, the court has the authority to divide or consolidate the combined claims for reasons of expediency if this facilitates procedural handling or is legally necessary.
Special features and exclusions
Not every claim is suitable for joinder of actions. It is particularly excluded in the case of different types of proceedings (e.g., main proceeding and interim relief), or where special provisions (such as in matrimonial or family disputes) apply. Additionally, the combined claims must not be mutually exclusive (incompatibility).
Joinder of actions in other procedural codes
Joinder of actions also applies in administrative proceedings (§ 44 VwGO) and labor court procedures (§ 46 (2) sentence 1 ArbGG in conjunction with § 260 ZPO), as well as in different rules of procedure, sometimes with their own specific regulations.
Practical relevance and significance
Joinder of actions primarily serves procedural economy and court relief by enabling concentrated, efficient, and bundled decision-making. For parties represented by a lawyer, it is often a strategic approach to pursue as many claims as possible in one proceeding and, if necessary, minimize litigation costs.
References
- Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) in its current version
- Thomas/Putzo: ZPO, Commentary
- Musielak/Voit: ZPO, Commentary
- Munich Commentary on the ZPO
Note: Joinder of actions is a complex procedural instrument whose application should always be examined carefully in each individual case, especially regarding the admissibility and expediency of combining different subject matters.
Frequently asked questions
How does joinder of actions affect the jurisdiction of the court?
The admissibility of a joinder of actions essentially depends on whether the court seized of the matter has both subject-matter and local jurisdiction over all combined claims. If different courts or panels are involved, a joinder of actions may be excluded, unless there are special statutory provisions permitting the combination of multiple claims. What is essential is always a uniform legal assessment of the combined claims with respect to the jurisdictional rules (e.g., §§ 12 ff. ZPO). If there is so-called concurrence of claims or joinder of parties, it must additionally be examined whether all requirements of the relevant provisions are fulfilled. Lack of jurisdiction regarding a single claim may result in severance or in the inadmissibility of the entire action with regard to the combined claims.
What role does the amount in dispute play in joinder of actions?
In joinder of actions, the amounts in dispute of the individual combined claims are generally summed according to § 5 ZPO, unless they are claims to be considered merely as ancillary claims (§ 4 ZPO). The total value thus determined can affect jurisdiction (for example, with courts having a specific threshold), court fees, and the admissibility of appeals. If, for example, the combined amount in dispute exceeds €5,000, the Regional Court (Landgericht) is usually the court of first instance. Additionally, the sum of the amounts in dispute is decisive for the amount of court and legal fees. Particular caution is warranted if individual claims are economically identical; in such cases, the highest amount in dispute is used rather than a simple addition.
What requirements must be met for an admissible joinder of actions?
Under § 260 ZPO, joinder of actions is only permissible if the combined claims are asserted by the same plaintiff against the same defendant and the competent court has jurisdiction over all claims. Moreover, the same type of proceedings must apply to all claims; in other words, for example, performance and declaratory actions may not be combined if this results in irreconcilable contradictions in the type of proceedings. Furthermore, the joinder of actions must not be intended to delay proceedings and must not make the conduct and management of the case unreasonably difficult for the court. The court may, if inadmissible, object to the joinder of actions ex officio and sever individual claims.
What types of claims may be asserted by way of joinder of actions?
Within the context of joinder of actions, both substantively different and similar claims may be combined, provided they exist between the same parties. It is irrelevant whether the claims arise under substantive law from the same factual situation or concern different factual situations. It is permissible, for example, to join claims arising from different contract types or to combine fulfillment claims and claims for damages. It is also possible to combine main and ancillary claims, although the latter often merge into the main application and do not constitute a separate amount in dispute.
What effect does an inadmissible joinder of actions have on the proceedings?
If the court determines that the joinder of actions is inadmissible, it is obligated either to sever the inadmissible claims ex officio (§ 145 ZPO) or to dismiss the action as inadmissible with regard to those claims. The proceedings continue for the remaining admissible claims. An inadmissible joinder of actions may in particular lead to delays, since the court must first determine admissibility and, if necessary, split the proceeding into several cases. There is also the risk that any appeal lodged with respect to an already severed claim must be handled separately.
To what extent can the court influence the joinder of actions?
The court is entitled, and in certain cases even obliged, to sever claims when the requirements are met (§ 145 ZPO). This not only serves procedural economy, but also prevents the court and parties from being overwhelmed by overly complex proceedings. The court can in particular order a division if joint proceedings would lead to significant procedural delay or if the clarification of claims depends on one another—whether substantively or procedurally. The decision is made by a reasoned order, against which an independent appeal is generally not admissible.
What procedural features apply to joinder of actions in payment order and documentary processes?
Special requirements apply to joinder of actions in payment order and documentary proceedings. In payment order proceedings, in principle, only monetary claims may be asserted, so that combining claims for performance with other types of claims is not possible. In documentary proceedings (§§ 592 ff. ZPO), the combination of different claims is only permitted if all combined claims may be asserted in documentary proceedings and the required documents are available to prove each claim. If these requirements are not met, the combination may be refused or a severance may be ordered.
What tactical considerations should a claimant bear in mind regarding joinder of actions?
The claimant should weigh whether joinder of actions makes sense from a procedural efficiency perspective. Although combining claims can lead to acceleration and cost savings, there is a risk of delay due to severance of inadmissible claims, increased complexity of the dispute, and potential jurisdictional issues. Furthermore, with several combined claims, one incurs higher cost and fee liability: in the event of losing, the claimant pays not only for a single amount in dispute, but for the total sum. Finally, a risky joinder of actions can result in an otherwise clearly justified claim being called into question, possibly leading to complete loss in trial.
