Explanation of the term and definition of reasoning in a legal context
Die Reasoning in legal matters refers to the presentation of the key considerations on which a decision, administrative act, court judgment, or formal legal action is based. It thus forms an essential component of the rule-of-law decision-making process and serves both to ensure the traceability and the verifiability of legal actions. Reasoning plays a central role in various areas of law and is codified in different provisions.
Legal basis of reasoning
Obligation to provide reasons in public law
In public law, the obligation to provide reasons is primarily anchored in the Administrative Procedure Acts (VwVfG). According to § 39 VwVfG, a written or electronic administrative act must be accompanied by reasoning. The reasoning must include the essential factual and legal grounds that were decisive for the decision. The objective is to make the decision transparent, enable the addressee to review it, and ensure effective legal protection.
For discretionary decisions, the obligation to provide reasons is especially high, as it is necessary to disclose how discretion was exercised. Exceptions to the obligation only exist in cases provided by law, such as when providing reasons would endanger the purpose of the measure or is obvious to the affected party.
Reasoning in civil law
In civil proceedings, the significance of reasoning derives in particular from the provisions regarding the justification of judgments (§ 313 ZPO). Judgments must contain findings of fact, legal analysis, and an examination of both parties’ submissions. The obligation to provide reasons serves the control by the parties and by appellate courts.
Reasoning is also often required outside of court, for example, when rejecting applications or in contract negotiations when one party asserts or denies certain rights or claims.
Reasoning requirements in criminal law
In criminal law, the reasoning of a judgment is mandatory under § 267 StPO. It must clearly present the findings of fact underlying the verdict, the evaluation of evidence, and the legal assessment. This requirement upholds the rule of law and safeguards the function of review and transparency in judicial decisions.
Function and significance of reasoning
Transparency and control
Reasoning fulfills a central function for transparency and traceability in the application and enforcement of the law. Only by providing a detailed presentation of the basis for decisions can parties and third parties review the logic and accuracy of a decision.
Legal protection and verifiability
With regard to effective legal protection, reasoning enables judicial and administrative decisions to be properly challenged or reviewed. In particular, within the context of remedies, the parties’ possibility to attack or defend depends on sufficiently detailed and clear reasoning.
Legitimation and legal peace
Reasoned decisions enhance the acceptance of administrative or judicial measures by conveying to those affected that their arguments and interests were considered in the decision-making process. Thus, reasoning significantly contributes to legitimizing state action and promotes legal peace.
Types and forms of reasoning
Formal and substantive reasoning
Formal reasoning comprises the statutory minimum requirements for stating grounds. Substantive reasoning goes beyond this and provides a more comprehensive explanation of the facts and the legal evaluation.
Detailed and brief reasoning
The scope of the reasoning depends on the type and significance of the decision. While fundamental decisions require detailed reasoning, a shorter statement of reasons is sufficient for straightforward cases. Case law has developed specific standards for this (e.g., for automated administrative acts).
Reasoning in procedures and legal remedies
Reasoning for applications, submissions, and legal remedies
In civil, administrative, and criminal proceedings, giving reasons for applications, lawsuits, or legal remedies is a procedural requirement for their admissibility. For example, an appeal under § 520 ZPO must be reasoned in writing. The absence of proper reasoning can lead to the inadmissibility of the remedy.
Reasoning for court decisions
Judicial decisions, whether judgments, orders, or directives, must generally be supported by reasons. The manner in which the obligation is fulfilled varies according to procedural rules. It serves legal clarity and effective review by the next instance.
Legal consequences of missing or deficient reasoning
A missing or insufficient reasoning can have serious consequences. In administrative law, this can result in the illegality and annulment of an administrative act. In civil and criminal procedural law, inadequate reasoning can constitute grounds for appeal and thus lead to the decision being set aside by a higher instance.
International aspects of the duty to provide reasons
The duty to provide reasons for decisions is enshrined not only in German law but also in international and supranational rules. For instance, Article 6(1) ECHR confers the right to a fair trial, which includes the obligation to provide reasons for judicial decisions. Similarly, European standards such as the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Art. 41) require the obligation to give reasons in administrative procedures.
Summary
Reasoning is a central pillar of the rule of law and an essential element for ensuring effective legal protection, transparency, and legitimacy of decisions in the legal system. Its implementation and structure are regulated differently in the various legal fields and procedural regulations but are always aimed at ensuring and promoting the traceability and verifiability of legal decisions. Failure to comply with the duty to give reasons can have significant legal consequences and is strictly sanctioned by the courts.
Frequently Asked Questions
When is reasoning legally required in administrative procedure?
Reasoning is legally required in administrative procedure under § 39 of the Administrative Procedure Act (VwVfG) whenever a written or electronic administrative act is issued. The purpose of the duty to provide reasons is especially to ensure transparency of governmental action and to give the person concerned the opportunity to understand and, if necessary, effectively challenge the administrative act. The reasoning must include the essential factual and legal grounds that were decisive for the decision. There are exceptions to this, such as when it is not necessary to notify the reasoning due to the particular nature of the administrative act or overriding public interests. Nevertheless, in exceptional cases, subsequent reasoning is possible in order not to deprive someone of legal protection. Compliance with the duty to provide reasons is also regularly a prerequisite for the legality of the administrative act; the absence or inadequacy of reasoning can render the act unlawful and give the person concerned additional legal remedies.
What are the consequences of missing or deficient reasoning in an administrative act?
If the statutory reasoning for an administrative act is missing or materially deficient, this can affect the legality of the act. In principle, this constitutes a violation of procedural requirements and makes the administrative act unlawful. However, a missing statement of reasons does not automatically render the act void or ineffective. According to § 45 VwVfG, the reasoning can be supplied in the opposition procedure or (as far as still possible and reasonable) up to the conclusion of judicial proceedings. Only if the reasoning is not subsequently provided and no defect is cured in the course of proceedings, may this result in the annulment of the administrative act. A lack of reasoning may also result in deadlines for legal remedies being tolled or extended because it makes it more difficult for the affected person to defend effectively against the decision.
To what extent is the duty to provide reasons relevant in court proceedings?
In court proceedings, reasoning is also a central formal and substantive aspect. According to Article 103(1) of the Basic Law (right to be heard), § 313 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), and § 117 of the Code of Administrative Court Procedure (VwGO), judicial decisions must be reasoned. Reasoning serves both to ensure the traceability and review of judicial decisions and as a basis for admissible legal remedies. It must include the main considerations of the court regarding the factual and legal bases of the decision. Inadequate or missing reasoning constitutes a significant procedural defect and may form the basis for a successful appeal or revision. In criminal law, the duty is found in § 267 StPO, which requires the reasons for the judgment to be set forth in writing.
Are there exceptions to the obligation to provide reasons in administrative law?
In administrative law, § 39(2) VwVfG provides for exceptions to the obligation to provide reasons. In particular, reasoning is unnecessary if the request of the party is granted and no third-party rights are affected, or if the public is affected only in a typical, non-individual manner (mass administrative acts, such as levying of fees for a large number of people). The obligation also lapses in cases of public welfare, confidentiality, or overriding secrecy interests. In such cases, the public interest in secrecy may outweigh the individual’s interest in reasoning. However, the courts’ ability to review the decision remains intact; documents can be reviewed and, if appropriate, disclosed in court proceedings under certain conditions.
What requirements apply to the substantive form of a reasoning?
The reasoning must be formulated in such a way that the addressee of the administrative act or the judicial decision is able to comprehend the decisive considerations behind the decision. This includes a clear and comprehensible presentation of the facts and legal grounds leading to the decision. The reasoning must make it apparent which considerations and assessments were decisive factually and legally; mere formulaic phrases, blanket references, or empty expressions are not sufficient. For discretionary decisions, it must become particularly clear how discretion was exercised and to what extent public and private interests were weighed. The more severe the measure or complex the facts, the more detailed the reasoning must be. Even technical or complex legal considerations must be presented in a way that is understandable for laypersons, as far as this is possible and reasonable.
How can reasoning be subsequently supplemented or corrected?
Administrative procedural law allows, under § 45(1)(2) VwVfG, for subsequent provision of reasoning if it was originally missing or deficient. The reasoning can be supplemented until the conclusion of the last instance of fact in court proceedings, with subsequent provision especially envisaged in opposition proceedings. This can be done by written notification and usually cures the original procedural defect. For judicial decisions, correction of reasoning is regularly only possible for pure clerical or calculation errors (§ 319 ZPO); other subsequent amendments are generally excluded since the decision becomes effective upon pronouncement.
What role does reasoning play in the exercise of discretion?
In discretionary decisions, reasoning is of particular significance because it reveals whether and how discretion was actually exercised (§ 40 VwVfG). The authority must therefore not only state the legal basis, but also provide a detailed account of the considerations that led to the choice among multiple legally permissible solutions. The obligation to provide reasons is intended, among other things, to make errors in the exercise of discretion (failure to exercise discretion, exceeding discretion, or misuse of discretion) identifiable. The court can use the reasoning to check whether the administration has exercised its discretion properly; absent or deficient reasoning may suggest that discretion was not exercised at all or was exercised incorrectly.
