Concept and Function of the Deciding Court
Das Deciding Court is a central concept in German procedural law. It refers to the court that makes a substantive decision in a specific legal matter. The Deciding Court stands in contrast to other courts involved in the proceedings, which only carry out or prepare procedural acts, such as the Investigating Court or the Enforcement Court. In the course of its activities, the Deciding Court, in particular, deals with the main decision in criminal, civil, and administrative proceedings and is decisive for the course and the outcome of the process.
The Legal Classification of the Deciding Court
Definition and Typical Tasks
The term ‘Deciding Court’ originates from criminal procedure law, but is also analogously applied in all areas of ordinary jurisdiction as well as in the specialist courts. The Deciding Court is responsible for conducting the main hearing, collecting and evaluating evidence, and making the final substantive decision on guilt and punishment or, respectively, claim and entitlement.
Distinction from Other Court Roles
- Investigating Court: Ensures the conduct of the proceedings, but does not decide on guilt or legal claim.
- Enforcement Court: Executes the decision of the Deciding Court but does not conduct a main hearing.
- Appellate Court: Reviews the decision of the Deciding Court for legal or procedural errors, but does not (any longer) decide on the main issue.
Legal Basis in Procedural Law
Im Criminal Procedure Law the Deciding Court is regulated in Sections 162 et seq. of the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO). For civil procedure law, Sections 253 et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) govern its responsibilities. Administrative procedure law references this in the relevant sections of the Administrative Court Procedure Act (VwGO).
Composition of the Deciding Court
Rules on Composition
The composition of the Deciding Court depends on the type of proceedings and the legal path. The statutory rules on composition are found particularly in the Act on the Constitution of Courts (GVG) as well as in the procedural codes.
In Criminal Proceedings
- District Court (Single Judge or Panel of Lay Judges)
- Regional Court (Small or Large Criminal Chamber)
- Lay judges and professional judges often form the Deciding Court in mixed panels, depending on the criminal offense and the potential sentence.
Schöffen und Berufsrichter bilden dabei oft in gemischten Spruchkörpern das Erkennende Gericht, abhängig vom jeweiligen Straftatbestand und dem Strafmaß.
In Civil Proceedings
- Single judge or chamber (e.g. in the regional court at least three professional judges, in higher instances sometimes a senate composition)
- Commercial and Special Chambers (e.g. Chamber for Commercial Matters)
In Administrative Courts
- Single judge or chamber/senate (composed of professional judges and, in certain proceedings, also honorary judges)
Challenge of Composition and Consequences of Erroneous Composition
An error in the composition of the Deciding Court constitutes a serious procedural violation. The challenge of composition (Section 222b StPO, Section 119 GVG) must be raised early. A violation regularly leads to the annulment of the judgment if the proper composition cannot be established.
Duties and Powers of the Deciding Court
Main Proceedings and Taking of Evidence
The Deciding Court is responsible for leading the main hearing, conducting the full taking of evidence, and the legal and factual assessment of the case. This includes:
- Examination of parties, witnesses, and experts
- Collection and evaluation of documents and physical evidence
- Submission of motions for evidence and decisions on evidence
- Opening and closing of the main hearing
Competence to Decide
The Deciding Court renders the final substantive decision by judgment, order, or other final ruling. Its decision is enforceable and constitutes the legal basis for potential appeals or enforcement measures.
Comparison: Deciding Court and Appellate Court
The Deciding Court is responsible for the initial substantive decision. In the course of further proceedings, the appellate court (appeal or revision instance) takes its place but generally does not conduct a full re-examination of evidence, focusing instead on questions of law and procedural errors. This distinction is crucial for appealing judgments and reviewing them for legal errors.
Significance of the Deciding Court in Different Procedural Codes
Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO)
The StPO clearly distinguishes between investigating, deciding, and enforcement courts. After the investigation is completed, the Deciding Court is responsible for the main proceedings and for rendering the judgment (Section 222 StPO).
Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO)
In the ZPO, too, the Deciding Court is the panel responsible for the main hearing and the final judgment. The service of the claim, hearing, and subsequent decision are carried out by the same court.
Administrative Court Procedure Act (VwGO)
The main matter decision is made by the panel of the respective court (single judge or chamber). Here, too, the court responsible for the decision corresponds to the Deciding Court.
Further Reading and References
For a deeper understanding of the Deciding Court in German procedural law, the following works are recommended:
- Meyer-Goßner/Schmitt, Strafprozessordnung, Commentary, current edition
- Thomas/Putzo, Zivilprozessordnung, Commentary, current edition
- Kopp/Schenke, Verwaltungsgerichtsordnung, Commentary, current edition
Conclusion and Significance for the German Legal System
Das Deciding Court is an indispensable part of the German legal and judicial system. Its duties and powers form the foundation of every substantive court decision, regardless of the area of law. Understanding its function, composition, and procedural principles is essential for the practical application and enforcement of substantive law in legal proceedings.
Frequently Asked Questions
What duties and powers does the deciding court have in criminal proceedings?
The deciding court is the court entrusted with the main hearing and assessment of guilt and sentencing. Its tasks primarily include comprehensive clarification of the facts (so-called principle of ex officio investigation in criminal procedure), managing the main hearing including the ordering and execution of the taking of evidence, as well as ensuring the procedural rights of all parties involved (e.g. defendant, defense counsel, prosecution, joint plaintiff). It makes orders to ensure proper conduct (for example, in case of disturbances in the courtroom, summonses, scheduling, exclusion of the public according to Sections 171b GVG), decides on motions for evidence (Sections 244 et seq. StPO), determines the course of the hearing, and finally renders the judgment at the end of the main hearing, possibly including measures for rehabilitation and security. Of particular importance is its neutrality: it must ensure independent and impartial decision-making. After the judgment is passed, the deciding court is also responsible for certain related decisions, such as suspending sentence on probation or subsequent decisions (Section 462a StPO).
How is the deciding court composed in terms of personnel, and how is it determined?
The composition of the deciding court depends on the specific charge and the expected legal consequence. In German criminal law, there are different panels: single judge, panel of lay judges, large criminal chamber, jury court, and criminal senates at the Higher Regional Court/Federal Court of Justice. Jurisdiction and composition arise in particular from the Courts Constitution Act (GVG) and the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO), for example Sections 24 et seq. GVG. The business distribution and composition are determined publicly at the court at the beginning of the year on abstract criteria (Sections 21e GVG) to prevent manipulation. The composition of the personnel generally remains until pronouncement of the judgment (principle of personnel continuity, Section 226 StPO). Changes are only permitted under narrow statutory conditions, e.g. due to illness.
To what extent is the deciding court bound by prior assessments and previous judicial actions?
The deciding court is generally not bound by prior judicial decisions in investigative proceedings, such as remand orders (Section 126 (2) StPO) or search warrants. It is also not bound by legal assessments of the prosecution, the investigating judge, or another panel in the context of interim decisions: It is independent in its decision-making. Only certain formal and procedural requirements (e.g. admissibility of the indictment according to Section 203 StPO) must be observed. There remains full freedom of decision, both substantively and in weighing evidence. However, the deciding court can consider previous judicial findings from earlier proceedings for the purpose of assessing evidence, but must form its own conviction independently.
What special requirements apply to the impartiality of the deciding court?
Impartiality of the deciding court is mandated by the Constitution and by law (Art. 101(1) sentence 2 GG, Sections 22 et seq. StPO). Judges may not be involved in the specific proceedings if grounds for disqualification or recusal exist, such as prior involvement, personal interest, or suspicion of bias. The court must ensure that no conflict of interest or personal involvement can influence the decision-making. Procedurally, this is monitored by recusal motions (Sections 24 et seq. StPO). Violations of this principle can lead to the annulment of judgments on appeal.
How does the deciding court differ from other judicial instances in criminal proceedings?
The deciding court is the one that makes the final decision in the main hearing and delivers the judgment. This distinguishes it, for example, from the investigating judge, who primarily acts during the investigation stage (e.g. ordering coercive measures), or the court of complaint, which exercises supervisory functions over certain procedural acts. The deciding court is the panel in the first instance, but it can also act as an appellate or review court. In the higher instances (appeal, review), other specially competent courts take on the role of the deciding court for the respective proceedings.
What role does the deciding court play regarding legal remedies?
After pronouncing the judgment, the deciding court remains responsible for certain decisions, such as those regarding appeal or review (provided it is itself the appeal or review court), as well as for decisions on motions for suspension of sentence on probation, subsequent sentences, or enforcement matters (e.g. revocation of probation under Section 453 StPO by the original trial court). If legal remedies are lodged, the deciding court first examines their admissibility and, in appeals, can independently review and alter the judgment, whereas review proceedings are usually limited to questions of law. In the case of review, the court of first instance prepares the minutes and files for the reviewing court.
What legal remedies are available against decisions or measures of the deciding court?
Parties to the proceedings can lodge various legal remedies against decisions of the deciding court. During the proceedings, the appeal is available in particular against certain interlocutory decisions (Sections 304 et seq. StPO). Appeals or review can be filed against the judgment itself (Sections 312, 333 StPO) if the respective requirements are met. In addition, the deciding court can be challenged for bias (Section 24 StPO) or certain measures (e.g. rejection of an application to take evidence) can be contested by objection or—in individual cases—by so-called ‘procedural objections’ in review proceedings. Orders for disciplinary measures can also be challenged in the appeal court for review.
