Definition and legal classification of the supplementary judgment
Das Supplementary Judgment is a special judicial decision in German civil procedure law. It is issued when a court has already decided a part of the subject matter in dispute by (main) judgment, and subsequently needs to decide on another part that has so far been omitted or overlooked. The supplementary judgment is particularly used to decide on motions that were disregarded in the original judgment, such as the cost decision or the provisional enforceability. The legal basis for the supplementary judgment is found in Section 321 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO).
Requirements and scope of application
Substantive requirements
A supplementary judgment is only considered if, when rendering a (main) judgment, the court fails to decide a significant part of the subject matter of the proceedings – particularly certain motions. This can occur in the following constellations:
- Without intent, individual motions are overlooked by the court (for example, omission of subsidiary motions – such as on cost allocation or interest payment).
- The operative part of the judgment lacks a statement that would have been necessary (e.g., missing decision on provisional enforceability).
- Non-independent ancillary decisions or other procedural issues are mistakenly not addressed.
The supplementary judgment thus complements the already issued judgment and eliminates its incompleteness.
Legal basis
The legal basis for the supplementary judgment is Section 321 ZPO. The statutory text reads:
“If the court, in its judgment, has not addressed a significant part of the subject matter in dispute, it may decide on this part upon application by means of a subsequent judgment.”
Furthermore, Section 329(2) ZPO explicitly provides that a supplementary judgment can also be issued at the appellate level.
Procedure for issuing a supplementary judgment
Entitlement to apply and application deadline
The supplementary judgment is issued solely upon application by a party. Without such an application, the court does not act on its own initiative. The deadline for application is stipulated in Section 321(2) ZPO and is two weeks after service of the original judgment. Within this period, the application for issuance of a supplementary judgment must be filed.
Content and form of the supplementary judgment
The supplementary judgment essentially has the same formal structure as a “regular” judgment: It consists of the heading, operative part, facts, grounds for decision, and the signature of the deciding judges. It must clarify which outstanding points of the original judgment it refers to. In the operative part, the previously omitted applications must be fully addressed.
Distinction from other judicial decisions
The supplementary judgment must be distinguished from other subsequent judicial decisions:
- Complementary judgment (Section 321 ZPO): The terms “complementary judgment” and “supplementary judgment” are often used synonymously. Strictly speaking, however, the supplementary judgment generally refers to the decision on previously unaddressed motions, while the complementary judgment in particular concerns subsequent decisions on ancillary matters (e.g., costs, enforceability).
- Correction under Section 319 ZPO: Serves to correct clerical or calculation errors, but not to supplement omitted decisions.
- Correction of the judgment ex officio: The court can correct errors in the facts or wording on its own initiative, but omitted applications can only be addressed via a supplementary judgment.
Legal effects and significance of the supplementary judgment
Binding effect
A supplementary judgment supplements the original judgment in such a way that both judgments together are regarded as a single whole. After the supplementary judgment is issued, the res judicata effect extends to all parts decided by both the original and supplementary judgment.
Appealability
Like any judgment, the supplementary judgment can be appealed with the permissible legal remedies. The regular periods for appeal or complaint begin upon service of the supplementary judgment, provided the appeal relates exclusively to the subject matter of the supplementary judgment. If a party appeals both the original and the supplementary judgment, both judgments must be contested with the appropriate legal remedy.
Practical relevance and typical applications
Frequent examples of application
The supplementary judgment is particularly relevant in judicial practice when:
- No decision was made on applications regarding costs.
- The decision on provisional enforceability is missing in the main judgment.
- The subject matter in dispute was decided only in part by a partial judgment, with the remainder unintentionally left unaddressed.
- No judgment was made on an ancillary set-off.
Significance for the parties
For the parties to a legal dispute, the supplementary judgment ensures a complete decision on all motions filed in the proceedings and guarantees comprehensive legal certainty. It also serves effective legal protection by allowing subsequent correction of gaps in the findings procedure.
Special cases and peculiarities of the supplementary judgment
Supplementary judgment in appellate proceedings
According to Section 329(2) ZPO, the court of appeal may also issue a supplementary judgment if, when deciding on the appeal, it has not recognized parts of the subject matter of the dispute. The procedural rules largely correspond to those of the first-instance supplementary judgment.
Binding to the main judgment
The supplementary judgment must not question or change the substance of the original judgment. Its sole purpose is to provide a subsequent decision on previously unaddressed points of dispute. A substantive amendment of the first-instance judgment by means of a supplementary judgment is not permitted.
References and further sources
- Zöller, ZPO, § 321 margin no. 1 ff.
- Musielak/Voit, ZPO, § 321 margin no. 1 ff.
- Thomas/Putzo, ZPO, § 321 margin no. 1 ff.
- BGH, judgment of 10.07.2014 – IX ZR 360/13
- Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO), § 321
Summary
The supplementary judgment is an important instrument for completing judicial decisions in civil proceedings. It ensures that all applications and subject matters of a case are fully decided. Its legal foundations are primarily anchored in Section 321 ZPO. The supplementary judgment makes a significant contribution to ensuring legal certainty and effective legal protection by retroactively supplementing subject matters left undecided.
Frequently asked questions
In which cases can a supplementary judgment be issued?
A supplementary judgment is always considered if the judgment has not addressed a part of the asserted claim or a procedural ancillary issue – such as costs or enforceability – at all or not explicitly. The requirement is that there is an “unresolved decision” and that this is not due to an implicit rejection of the request. Typical cases include accidental omission of an auxiliary motion, failure to determine costs, or omission of the decision regarding interest. The supplementary judgment serves to fill such gaps without overturning or altering the operative part of the existing judgment. However, a supplementary judgment is only possible as long as the main judgment has not become final and binding, since once it is res judicata, retroactively issuing decisions is generally excluded.
How does a supplementary judgment differ from a complementary judgment?
German civil procedural law differentiates between supplementary judgment and complementary judgment. While the supplementary judgment according to Section 321 ZPO (Code of Civil Procedure) covers a missing decision on an actually asserted but overlooked issue, the complementary judgment serves to subsequently reach a forgotten cost decision. In practice, however, the terms are often used interchangeably, which is technically incorrect. It is important to note that the complementary judgment is usually broader and does not only address procedural ancillary decisions; the supplementary judgment, on the other hand, can relate both to the unaddressed claim itself and to procedural ancillary decisions.
Is the application for a supplementary judgment subject to a deadline?
The application for issuance of a supplementary judgment is generally subject to a deadline. According to Section 321(2) ZPO, the application may only be filed within two weeks after service of the complete judgment. The two-week period serves to accelerate proceedings and ensure legal certainty. If the party misses this deadline, the application is inadmissible, unless the failure is not attributable to fault or the court subsequently acts ex officio. However, it is also possible to object to the lack of decision within the framework of appeal or revision, provided the main judgment is not yet final.
What effects does the supplementary judgment have on the original judgment?
The supplementary judgment exclusively supplements the already issued judgment with the previously missing decision and leaves its other, already made findings unaffected. It operates retroactively, meaning that the actual entry of the substantive res judicata refers to the date of the original judgment. This ensures that no contradictory decisions arise. Any legal remedies against the main judgment, due to their connection, also extend to the supplementary judgment if the respective complaint has not yet been finally decided. It should also be noted that the period for appeal may in certain circumstances be affected, particularly if a complete decision on the subject matter is rendered for the first time with the supplementary judgment.
To what extent is the supplementary judgment subject to the condition of res judicata?
The supplementary judgment, like the main judgment, is subject to appeal and does not become final automatically just because the main judgment has gained formal force. In fact, the issuance of a missed decision by supplementary judgment is only possible if the main judgment has not yet become res judicata regarding the omitted point. Once res judicata attaches to the relevant subject matter, the path to a supplementary judgment is blocked. This serves legal certainty and prevents prolonged uncertainty about the validity of court decisions.
Can substantive errors of the main judgment also be corrected in the supplementary judgment?
No, the supplementary judgment is only allowed to make the omitted decision. Substantive errors of the main judgment, such as an incorrect interpretation of the facts or the norm, cannot be corrected within the supplementary judgment. Classic legal remedies such as appeal, revision, or complaint regarding denial of the right to be heard are available for this purpose. The supplementary judgment serves a purely supplemental function and is not intended to enable a complete re-evaluation or amendment of already made decisions.
What legal remedies are available against a supplementary judgment?
The same legal remedies are generally available against the supplementary judgment as against the main judgment. This is typically an appeal or – for certain value thresholds or with permission – a revision or complaint. In addition, errors in the issuance of a supplementary judgment, such as if a matter that is already res judicata is improperly decided again, can be contested by complaint regarding denial of the right to be heard (Section 321a ZPO) or, in special cases, by immediate complaint. The deadlines for legal remedies generally begin with formal service of the supplementary judgment and are independent of the deadlines for the main judgment.
