Definition and significance of the Grundurteil in civil procedural law
Das Grundurteil is a term from German civil procedure law. It refers to a court decision that rules exclusively on the merits (i.e., existence or non-existence of an obligation) of a claim, but not on the amount (the “sum”) of the claim. The Grundurteil constitutes a special form of judgment alongside final judgment, partial judgment, and interlocutory judgment. In German civil procedure, it is governed by Section 304 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO).
Statutory bases
The possibility of issuing a Grundurteil is governed by § 304 ZPO. According to this provision, the court may, upon application by a party, decide by Grundurteil if both the merits and the amount of the claim are in dispute, and the prerequisites for a final decision on the scope of the claim are not currently met. The procedure then continues to determine the amount.
Wording of § 304 para. 1 ZPO:
“If both the merits and the amount of the claim are disputed, the court may, on application, decide in advance by Grundurteil on the merits if a partial judgment pursuant to § 301 cannot be issued.”
Requirements for the issuance of a Grundurteil
Dispute regarding both the merits and the amount
A Grundurteil is only permissible if the claim asserted is disputed in two respects: both the merits (the “whether”) and the amount (the “how much”) must be in dispute. If only the amount is disputed, a partial judgment may be considered instead.
Divisibility of the claim
Divisibility of the claim is not required for a Grundurteil. Unlike a partial judgment (§ 301 ZPO), the subject matter of the dispute does not need to be factually or legally divisible. The Grundurteil rules only on the merits and expressly excludes the amount.
Decision on procedural bases for the claim
With the Grundurteil, the court makes a final, legally binding determination on the legal basis of the claim and its legal prerequisites (elements of the offense), provided these can already be clarified factually.
No final determinability of the amount
A key criterion is that, at the time of the decision, the amount of the claim cannot yet be determined, for example due to existing uncertainties, issues needing clarification, or unresolved questions of fact.
Function and purpose of the Grundurteil
The Grundurteil serves in particular the efficiency of proceedings. It enables clarification of the legal status of a claim even when the scope or amount can only be determined at a later stage. This is often the case in damages proceedings, for example after traffic accidents or in cases of protracted medical malpractice.
By separately deciding on the merits and the amount, the Grundurteil saves the parties from engaging in complex calculations and the taking of evidence regarding the amount of the claim while it is still unclear whether the claim has any legal prospects of success.
Effects of the Grundurteil
Binding effect (preclusion effect)
The Grundurteil exerts a binding effect on subsequent proceedings regarding the amount of the claim. After the issuance of the Grundurteil, it is established that the claimant is entitled to a claim on the merits. The actual assessment, namely determination of the amount, remains the only open matter in dispute.
Once the amount has been determined, the court is bound by the decision on the merits made in the Grundurteil.
Legal remedies
A Grundurteil is a full-fledged judgment within the meaning of the ZPO and is therefore subject to ordinary legal remedies. It can be challenged by appeal (for judgments at first instance) or by revision (for judgments at second instance).
Continuation of the proceedings regarding the amount
Following issuance of the Grundurteil, the proceedings continue in the so-called “amount proceedings”. At this stage—possibly after further statement of facts and taking of evidence—the amount of the claim is determined and established by a separate judgment (often referred to as amount judgment or final judgment).
Distinction from other forms of judgment
Partial judgment
A partial judgment is issued pursuant to § 301 ZPO on a separable (divisible) part of the subject matter in dispute. In contrast, the Grundurteil does not depend on the divisibility of the claim.
Interlocutory judgment
The interlocutory judgment is similar to the Grundurteil, but usually concerns the clarification of individual preliminary questions or objections, such as the admissibility of the action (§§ 280 ff. ZPO). The Grundurteil, on the other hand, decides the main substance of the claim on the merits.
Final judgment
The final judgment ends the legal dispute as a whole. The Grundurteil decides only on a partial aspect, namely the merits of the claim.
Practical areas of application
Grundurteil is primarily used in proceedings in which procedural issues regarding the existence of a claim must first be clarified before any time-consuming taking of evidence or calculation regarding the amount of the claim is conducted. Typical examples include:
- Claims for damages with unclear loss amount
- Cases involving time-consuming taking of evidence regarding the amount of damages
- Actions for the surrender of property when the items to be surrendered or their value have not yet been determined
- Disputes over compensation for use or reasonable remuneration
Procedural steps for the issuance of a Grundurteil
Requirement of an application
A Grundurteil can be issued on application by a party or ex officio, provided the requirements under § 304 ZPO are met.
Oral hearing and taking of evidence
During the oral hearing and the taking of evidence, the court focuses exclusively on the requirements of the claim. Evidence relating to the amount is, if necessary, only taken afterwards.
Issuance and pronouncement
After the merits of the claim have been sufficiently clarified, the court issues the Grundurteil. In the reasons for the decision, it sets out to what extent the claimant has a claim against the defendant on the merits.
Continuation with the amount proceedings
Subsequently, the proceedings are usually suspended or continued to separately determine the amount of the claim.
Significance for the debtor
For the debtor, the Grundurteil entails an increased risk of liability, as it is now established that there is a basic obligation. However, enforcement based on the Grundurteil is generally not possible since the exact amount to be enforced has not yet been quantified.
Summary
The Grundurteil is a judicial ruling in civil proceedings that determines only the existence or non-existence and legal validity of a claim. The amount of the claim remains reserved for subsequent proceedings. This form of decision achieves a proper, efficient consolidation of disputed points as well as a relief of the parties, the court, and the overall duration of the proceedings. The statutory basis is § 304 ZPO. The Grundurteil is of considerable importance, especially in complex situations, and constitutes an effective instrument for structuring and accelerating civil court proceedings.
Frequently asked questions
What are the requirements for issuing a Grundurteil?
For the issuance of a Grundurteil under § 304 ZPO, it is required that both the merits and the amount of a claim are in dispute in the proceedings. The court may separate the proceedings regarding the amount and initially rule solely on the merits, i.e., whether the claimant is entitled to a claim on the merits. The prerequisite is that the claim is at least partially substantiated and that facts supporting the claim have been presented, allowing a final decision on the substantive claim. A Grundurteil is not permissible if the asserted claim is clearly entirely unfounded or unsubstantiated. Furthermore, there must be a suitable separability between the merits and the amount, meaning that there must not be an inseparable connection between the basis of liability and the determination of the amount of damages. The court must also ensure that no findings relevant to the dispute over the amount are made in the Grundurteil, in order to maintain equality of arms.
Can the court issue a Grundurteil against the will of the parties?
Yes, the court is in principle entitled to issue a Grundurteil even against the will of the parties, provided that the statutory requirements are met. This follows from the wording of § 304 para. 1 ZPO, which requires neither the consent nor the application of either party. The design of the proceedings is at the court’s dutiful discretion in this respect. The purpose is to achieve more efficient and focused conduct of proceedings, especially where clarification of the merits is complex but determining the amount is easier or can be done at a later procedural stage. Exceptions only apply, for example, if there is, by exception, a legitimate interest of a party which would make separation unreasonable.
What legal remedies are available against a Grundurteil?
An admissible appeal can be lodged against a Grundurteil, provided the required amount in dispute is exceeded and there are no grounds for exclusion. It should be noted that the Grundurteil is a partial judgment and can, in principle, be independently contested with ordinary legal remedies. If the Grundurteil is not independently contested, it is subject to the binding effect in subsequent proceedings regarding the amount, so that objections to the merits are only possible to a limited extent. If only the amount is further litigated, the issue of liability—that is, the merits—can, in principle, no longer be decided to the detriment of the claimant.
What binding effect does a Grundurteil have for the further proceedings?
The Grundurteil has a binding effect in the same dispute regarding the determination that a claim exists on the merits. In the subsequent amount proceedings, the court is bound by the findings regarding the merits (§ 318 ZPO), meaning that the findings on liability must be used as a basis in the amount proceedings. Should the Grundurteil become formally final, challenges to the basis of liability established therein are generally excluded. However, certain defenses that relate exclusively to the amount of the claim (such as partial payments already made) remain permissible even after issuance of the Grundurteil.
What risks does a Grundurteil pose for the parties?
A Grundurteil entails specific risks for both parties. The claimant risks that after a successful Grundurteil, evidentiary problems regarding the actual damage or amount may arise in the amount proceedings, making enforcement of the total claim challenging. The defendant risks that with the Grundurteil becoming final, most defenses regarding the basis of liability are largely cut off. Moreover, if significant objections to the merits were not raised in time, preclusion effects may arise that could have adverse effects in subsequent proceedings.
Is enforcement already possible after a Grundurteil?
In principle, enforcement cannot be based solely on a Grundurteil, since although the Grundurteil confirms the merits of a claim, it lacks the specific quantification of the amount necessary for enforcement. Only after completion of the amount proceedings and issuance of a final judgment on the concrete amount can the claimant proceed to enforce the enforceable judgment. The Grundurteil primarily serves the efficiency of proceedings, not immediate legal protection through enforcement.
Can ancillary claims also be decided in the Grundurteil?
The Grundurteil is limited in its effect to the claim on the merits and generally also covers any ancillary claims (such as interest or legal fees) if their existence is also linked to the merits of the main claim. The precise amount of ancillary claims, as with the main claim, is generally only determined in the subsequent amount judgment, unless an unambiguous decision regarding such ancillary claims can already be made in the Grundurteil. The final determination usually only takes place in the concluding judgment.
