Parol

Concept and Definition of Parol

The term Parol originates from the French and Latin languages (French: parole, Latin parabola = conversation, word, utterance) and holds various, context-specific meanings in the legal realm. Generally, parol describes an oral statement or agreement as opposed to a written record. In German law, the term is rarely used as a set term, whereas it holds significant legal relevance in the Anglo-American legal system, particularly in common law.

Below, the different legal manifestations and areas of application of the term parol are listed and explained both in German and international law.

Parol in German Law

General Meaning

In German law, parol primarily refers to the oral declaration of intent, that is, the spoken word. These are legally relevant declarations that are not fixed in writing but are expressed through verbal communication or by implied conduct.

Relevance of Oral Agreements

German contract law is generally governed by the principle of freedom of form (§ 125 BGB), according to which contracts and other declarations of intent can be made informally—that is, also orally—unless a specific form (e.g., written form, notarization) is prescribed by law. Oral agreements (parol) are therefore generally legally binding; however, they may pose evidentiary problems, since in case of dispute, proving the agreements reached is more difficult. In certain areas (e.g., real estate transactions, sureties), the law explicitly requires written form or notarization, so that parol declarations in such cases are not legally effective or only establish a so-called natural obligation.

Parol as the Opposite of Deed/Document

In the law of evidence, parol stands as an antonym to documents. In taking evidence, parol statements are generally established through witness testimony, while written agreements are proven through presentation of the document. In practice, this is especially relevant in the context of the so-called “four-eyes principle” and documentary evidence.

Parol in the Anglo-American Legal System (Common Law)

The Meaning of Parol in Common Law

In common law, particularly in English and US law, the term parol has a special application. On one hand, it refers to oral agreements that exist alongside or outside a written contract, and on the other, to the associated Parol Evidence Rule.

Parol Evidence Rule

Die Parol Evidence Rule is a significant rule of evidence in common law. According to this rule, when interpreting a written contract, oral or earlier written collateral agreements made outside the document (parol evidence) may generally not be used to prove the content of the contract. The aim of this rule is to ensure legal certainty and clarity by establishing the content of a written contract as final and binding.

Exceptions to the Parol Evidence Rule

There are numerous exceptions to the Parol Evidence Rule. Parol evidence is permissible if:

• the written contract is incomplete or partial (partial integration),
• subsequent agreements have been made,
• the existence of errors, fraud, or mistake is to be proved,
• the contracting parties had varying intentions regarding specific clauses,
• evidence is to be provided that the contract is suspended or invalid.

These exceptions serve, on the one hand, to ensure contract fidelity, but also take account of substantive justice.

Parol Contract

Als Parol Contract in the Anglo-American legal area refers to any contract that is not made in writing but is entered into solely orally or through implied conduct (tacitly). Such contracts are fully effective, except in cases where a specific form is required (e.g. sale of real estate), but they may present evidentiary difficulties in case of dispute.

Legal Comparison – Parol in the International Context

Comparison of German and Anglo-American Legal Systems

While the term parol is rather exceptional in German law—in favor of the broader term ‘declaration of intent’—it holds central importance in the Anglo-American legal system for the delimitation and evidence of contractual contents. The Parol Evidence Rule is an important component of contract interpretation and aims to guarantee legal certainty through the written form and to protect against unauthorized expansion of contracts.

By contrast, in German law, contract interpretation according to §§ 133, 157 BGB allows circumstances outside the document to be taken into account through interpretation, provided there is no written form requirement.

Significance for Cross-Border Contractual Relationships

In international contractual relationships, especially in contracts between parties from the German and Anglo-American legal systems, particular attention must be paid to the different regulatory concepts. The respective applicability and understanding of parol evidence and parol contracts should be explicitly regulated in international contracts to avoid interpretation conflicts and problems of evidence.

Summary and Practical Relevance

The term parol generally denotes the spoken word not recorded in writing. While parol in German law is mainly understood as a synonym for oral statements and agreements, in common law it forms an important term in connection with the Parol Evidence Rule and parol contracts. The differing legal dogmatic approaches require particularly careful contract drafting and interpretation in international business. It is essential that oral agreements (parol) may in principle be legally binding, but they are subject to problems of proof, form requirements, and specific exceptions.

See also:

• Written form
• Contract law
• Law of evidence
• Interpretation of contracts

Literature:

• Palandt, Civil Code (BGB), Commentary, current edition.
• Trimble, A., The Parol Evidence Rule, Oxford 2019.
• Zweigert/Kötz, Introduction to Comparative Law, 19th edition.

Further links:

• <a href="https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/_125.html”>Civil Code (BGB), §§ 125 et seq.
• <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parolevidence_rule”>Parol Evidence Rule (Wikipedia, English)

Frequently Asked Questions

What legal requirements must be met for parol to be permitted under German law?

In German law, parol, meaning early release on probation, is subject to strict statutory requirements. It is primarily governed by the Criminal Code (StGB), particularly §§ 57 et seq. Accordingly, a prisoner may, upon application, be released on probation after serving two-thirds of the imposed custodial sentence; in special circumstances, release may even take place after half of the sentence has been served. However, such early release is only possible if, after a thorough assessment, the court is convinced that there is no danger that the convicted person will commit further criminal offenses (the so-called legal prognosis). In addition, the personality of the prisoner, their behavior during imprisonment, living circumstances, and the public interest in effective crime prevention must be taken into account. Release on probation is also ruled out if there are mandatory statutory grounds for exclusion, such as a life sentence without further judicial determination of special gravity of guilt or measures under juvenile criminal law.

What role does the probationary period play in parol, and how is it determined?

The probationary period is the length of time during which the person released on probation may spend their freedom under official supervision, but outside of actual imprisonment. The court sets the duration of the probationary period within the scope of parol, which must be at least two and at most five years (§ 57a para. 2 StGB). Within this timeframe, the length is tailored individually to the convicted person and the particularities of the individual case. During the probationary period, the released person must comply with certain conditions and instructions, which the court also issues individually, taking into account potential risks and reintegration opportunities. If a probation violation occurs during this time, probation may be revoked and the remaining sentence enforced.

What conditions and instructions can the court impose as part of parol?

Within the framework of parol, the court has the possibility to impose specific instructions and conditions on the convicted person to ensure successful reintegration and protection of the public. Pursuant to §§ 56c and 56d para. 2 StGB, such orders may include, for example, prohibition from staying at certain places, the obligation to take up employment, the obligation to pay damages or compensation for pain and suffering, or the requirement to report regularly to a probation officer. Participation in therapeutic measures or addiction counseling programs is also frequently ordered. The instructions must be suitable for serving the purpose of probation and may not impose unreasonable burdens on the convicted person. Compliance with the conditions and instructions is monitored by the probation service.

What are the consequences of violating conditions or instructions during parol?

If a person released on probation violates the conditions or instructions imposed upon them, this can have significant legal consequences. The court first reviews the extent and seriousness of the violation as well as any underlying circumstances. In the case of minor or first-time violations, it is often sufficient to issue a warning or impose new or stricter conditions. In cases of serious or repeated breaches, probation can be revoked (§ 56f StGB). In this event, the remaining sentence will be enforced, and the convicted person must serve the rest of their original custodial sentence in prison. Revocation of probation is also possible if the released person commits a new offense during the probationary period.

What is the significance of the legal prognosis for the decision regarding parol?

The legal prognosis is a central criterion for the decision on the granting of parol and represents the court’s assessment as to whether further criminal offenses are to be expected from the convicted person in the future. The court bases this prognosis on a variety of factors: previous criminal history, behavior during imprisonment, positive changes, remorse, insight into guilt, social ties, and prospects after release. The prognosis is also regularly supported by statements from experts, the prison manager, or the probation officer. If the prognosis is negative, conditional release is not possible, as the protection of the public takes precedence. A positive prognosis, on the other hand, is an essential prerequisite and must be substantiated to enable early release.

What legal remedies are available against the decision on parol?

The court’s decision on the granting or denial of parol is made by order, against which both the convicted person and the public prosecutor can lodge an immediate complaint within one week of notification (§ 463 StPO). This remedy allows the decision to be reviewed by a higher court, usually the regional or higher regional court. In the complaint proceedings, both procedural errors and the decision on the merits are reviewed. As a rule, no further remedy is available against the decision in the complaint proceedings. Only in exceptional cases may further review by the Federal Constitutional Court be possible, for instance if fundamental rights have been violated.

What happens if parol is reapplied for after being denied the first time?

If an application for parol is denied, the convicted person may file a new application after a period of six months (§ 57 para. 5 StGB). If there are obvious changes in the relevant circumstances, such as sustainable changes in the prisoner’s behavior or the fulfillment of new release requirements, a new application may be possible before the expiry of this period. The court will then re-examine whether the requirements for early release now exist. Each repeated application is reviewed independently, with the court paying particular attention to whether relevant developments have occurred that justify a fresh decision.