Legal Lexicon: Theory of Receipt
Die Theory of Receipt is a central principle in German civil law that determines when and under what conditions declarations of intent pertaining to legal transactions become effective upon being transmitted to a recipient. The theory is particularly significant in connection with contracts, terminations, and other legal declarations. The theory stands in contrast to the so-called Theory of Dispatch and is a fundamental principle for understanding the effect and receipt of declarations of intent in German law.
Basic Concepts and Position in the Legal System
Definition and Distinction
The theory of receipt states that a declaration of intent requiring receipt only becomes effective when it is received by the intended recipient. Receipt is deemed to occur when the declaration of intent enters the sphere of influence of the addressee in such a way that, under normal circumstances, the recipient can become aware of its content. This is the case, for example, when a letter is placed in the recipient’s mailbox.
Unlike the theory of dispatch, which considers a declaration effective upon being sent (for example, posting it by mail), the theory of receipt clearly focuses on the actual arrival at the recipient.
Legal Basis
The theory of receipt is regulated in Section 130(1) Sentence 1 of the German Civil Code (BGB):
“Declarations of intent that are to be made to another person become effective, if made in the absence of the person, at the moment they reach them.”
Therefore, the theory of receipt is not only a recognized doctrine but also codified in law.
Areas of Application of the Theory of Receipt
Contracts and Contract Law
Within contract law, the theory of receipt is particularly relevant to the offer and acceptance process. A contractual offer that reaches the recipient is binding from that point onwards. The same applies to the acceptance of an offer; only upon receipt of the acceptance does the contract become effectively concluded.
Terminations and Unilateral Legal Transactions
Unilateral declarations of intent that require receipt, such as terminations, withdrawals, or revocations, become effective only upon receipt by the addressee according to the theory of receipt. The effectiveness of a termination of an employment, tenancy, or service contract depends on when the notice of termination reaches the contractual partner.
Reminders and Time Limits
For reminders, deadlines, or other legal communications as well, receipt pursuant to the theory of receipt is decisive for the start of a period or the assertion of rights.
Receipt of a Declaration of Intent According to the Theory of Receipt
Concept of Receipt
According to the prevailing definition, receipt under Section 130 BGB occurs when the declaration “has reached the recipient’s sphere of influence in such a way that, under normal circumstances, knowledge is to be expected.” The requirements are therefore as follows:
- The declaration is within the recipient’s physical sphere of influence (for example, in the mailbox, fax machine, or email inbox)
- Taking notice would be possible and reasonable in the normal course of events
The actual will or act of acknowledgment is not required; the objective possibility of acknowledgment suffices.
Special Aspects and Examples
- Written Declarations: Receipt typically occurs when the declaration has entered the recipient’s mailbox and collection during ordinary times can be expected (for example, weekday mornings).
- Electronic Communication: For emails, faxes, or comparable electronic declarations, receipt is considered to have occurred when the declaration enters the recipient’s sphere (e.g., inbox/server) and can be expected to be retrievable under normal circumstances.
- Oral Declarations: If the declaration is made in person, it is received immediately upon hearing the words.
Legal Consequences of Receipt According to the Theory of Receipt
Effectiveness of Declarations of Intent
The declaration of intent becomes effective upon receipt. From this point onward, legal effects arise, such as the commencement of periods or contractual obligations. Pursuant to Section 130(1) Sentence 2 BGB, revocation is only possible if it is received before or at the same time as the declaration of intent.
Deadlines and Remedies
The beginning of legal time limits depends on receipt. This applies to notice periods, objection periods, or limitation periods, all of which often depend on the receipt of a declaration of intent.
Burden of Proof for Receipt
As a rule, the person making the declaration bears the burden of proof that the declaration of intent reached the recipient. In legal disputes, the party asserting rights based on receipt must present and prove receipt convincingly.
Special Scenarios and Peculiarities
Receipt in Cases of Absence and Change of Domicile
If a declaration arrives during a temporary change of the recipient’s location (e.g., vacation), receipt is generally deemed to have occurred when the item arrives in the mailbox, since the sphere of influence has been reached. An exception may apply if the recipient was unable to control the time of receipt for understandable and unavoidable reasons.
Receipt to Incapable and Underage Persons
For recipients lacking legal capacity (§ 104 BGB), a declaration of intent is only effective when received by the legal representative (§ 131 BGB). For minors, declarations must, depending on the representative situation, be addressed to the legal representative(s) accordingly.
Theory of Receipt in the International Context
The theory of receipt is not only established in German civil law. Comparable regulations are also found at the European level and in international private law, such as in the UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG). However, there are variations in the details, such as requirements for receipt in the context of different communication channels or transmission risks.
Relevance of the Theory of Receipt for Legal Practice
The theory of receipt is of great significance in everyday legal transactions. It protects both the declarant and the recipient through clear rules as to when declarations of intent become effective. In particular, it provides legal certainty and transparency for the observance of deadlines, the allocation of risk in the case of delays, and the requirements for legal transactions.
Bibliography and Further Sources
- German Civil Code (BGB), especially Section 130 et seq.
- Palandt, German Civil Code, Commentary, current edition
- MüKoBGB, Munich Commentary on the BGB, Section 130
- Federal Court of Justice (BGH) decisions, especially on receipt problems and burden of proof
Summary: The theory of receipt forms a fundamental pillar for the effectiveness of declarations of intent requiring receipt in German civil law. It provides legal certainty regarding the exact point in time when legal statements take effect, and is essential for deadlines, contract conclusions, terminations, and other unilateral legal transactions. Through the precise definition of receipt and the associated legal consequences, the theory of receipt is an indispensable element of contract law in Germany and internationally.
Frequently Asked Questions
What role does the theory of receipt play in German civil law in relation to declarations of intent?
The theory of receipt is of central importance in German civil law, particularly in the case of declarations of intent that require receipt. It determines when such a declaration is deemed to have been received and thus takes legal effect. According to Section 130(1) Sentence 1 BGB, a declaration of intent requiring receipt becomes effective only upon receipt by the recipient. In practical application, this means that a written declaration – such as an offer or termination – must be delivered to the recipient’s sphere of influence in such a way that knowledge can be expected under normal circumstances. It is not necessary for the recipient to actually read or immediately take notice of the declaration – it suffices if it enters their sphere of control (e.g., by being placed in their mailbox). The theory of receipt thus protects the declarant’s interest in legal certainty and the recipient’s interest in trust as to the time of receipt. Precisely determining that point in time can be decisive for deadlines and limitation periods.
How does the theory of receipt affect time limits in civil law?
The calculation of deadlines in civil law is fundamentally influenced by the theory of receipt, because many time limits (such as for the acceptance of offers, for terminations, or for revocations) only begin or end upon receipt of a declaration of intent. What matters is not the time the declaration is sent, but solely the time it is received by the recipient. Court rulings base this on the requirement that the declaration has entered the recipient’s sphere of control under normal circumstances and that, in the ordinary course of events, knowledge can be expected. A declaration received late may not be on time, unless there are circumstances mitigating the delay. For practitioners, this means that sufficient time should be allocated for delivery in order to avoid missing deadlines.
What significance does the theory of receipt have in employment law, especially regarding terminations?
In employment law, the theory of receipt holds particular significance: terminations, whether by employer or employee, are declarations of intent requiring receipt and become effective under Section 130(1) BGB only upon receipt by the recipient. For the effectiveness of a termination, it does not matter when it was sent; what counts is the actual receipt. Receipt is generally deemed to have occurred as soon as the notice of termination enters the sphere of control of the employee (e.g., mailbox or home) and acknowledgment under normal circumstances is possible. A notice of termination that has been received but (not yet) read nevertheless has legal effect. The theory of receipt therefore ensures legal certainty by clearly determining the start of termination periods.
How does the theory of receipt apply to different transmission methods, such as email or fax?
The application of the theory of receipt varies depending on the transmission method. For traditional postal letters, receipt is deemed to occur when the letter enters the mailbox. With electronic media, such as email or fax, court rulings differentiate: an email is considered received when it enters the electronic sphere of the recipient (e.g., email inbox) and acknowledgment would be possible under ordinary circumstances – for example, for a professional email account regularly checked during business hours at the time of receipt within these hours. Outside normal business hours, receipt is often assumed only on the next working day. For faxes, receipt is deemed to occur when the message is printed out on the receiving device, provided usual monitoring is in place. The party relying on receipt generally bears the burden of proof.
Are there exceptions or special rules relating to the theory of receipt?
In fact, the law provides a few exceptions to the strict application of the theory of receipt. There are, for example, declarations of intent that do not require receipt (such as the public offer of a reward according to Section 657 BGB). Statutory special provisions may also apply, such as when someone deliberately evades receipt – in such cases, the declaration of intent may be deemed to have been received (§ 242 BGB – “good faith”). In cases of “simple receipt” (e.g., handing a letter to an authorized person), a higher degree of binding force may be assumed. Special regulations also apply for receipt by persons lacking legal capacity or minors; in these cases, receipt must occur by the legal representative.
What are the consequences if a declaration of intent is not received according to the theory of receipt?
If a declaration of intent requiring receipt is not received, it has no legal effect. This means that, for instance, an offer, a termination, or a revocation is not valid as long as and to the extent that it has not been received. The party responsible for transmission bears the legal disadvantage. If, for example, a notice of termination is lost in the mail, the sender bears the risk of its non-receipt. An exception applies if the recipient fraudulently thwarts receipt; in that case, receipt may be deemed to have occurred. In all other cases, the declaration remains legally ineffective until received, and, in particular, periods do not commence or may be missed.
Who bears the burden of proof for receipt of a declaration of intent in the event of a dispute?
In the event of a dispute, the sender or the party relying on the effectiveness of the received declaration of intent generally bears the full burden of proof for receipt by the recipient. Receipt must be proven in a manner capable of withstanding judicial scrutiny, which in practice often leads to the use of reliable delivery methods such as registered mail, courier, or acknowledgment of receipt. Merely sending the item is insufficient. For electronic transmission methods such as email, furnishing proof is particularly challenging, as sending an email does not necessarily prove receipt. Here, it is advisable to use qualified electronic delivery services that provide a receipt protocol. If such evidence is lacking, the declaration of intent may be considered not received – and therefore not effective.
