Hamburg: No further witnesses in the pirate-process

In the so-called pirate trial before the Hamburg District Court, the defense lawyers have asked two defendants to hear a youth psychologists and members of the youth correctional facility Hahnofersand in court. This was rejected by the District Court: There are no other witnesses to be heard.

According to the indictment, the men from Somalia have made an attack on the maritime guilty and extortionate kidnapping, when in April 2010, a freighter off the coast of Somalia attacked.

In the process, put almost all the men made a confession, but said some of them had been forced to act.
The prosecution demanded prison sentences for the accused to four years to eleven years and six months, with seven accused should be tried under adult criminal law.

Bank robbery with a weapon, charges levied

The prosecutor has filed charges against Oldenburg a 50-year-olds. According to the indictment, the man was the end of August this year, rob a bank and it captured about 18,000 €. In fact, he threatened an employee with a weapon.
The man put the loot, according to prosecutors in his black bag and fled.

The police initially took only the clothes and the weapon in the bushes. Only two and a half weeks after the crime, the man could be arrested in Ulm and sits in custody since then.

He confessed to the crime. Now, the district court must decide on the opening of the proceedings. If convicted of serious extortion he faces a prison sentence of up to 15 years.

Railway undertakings to the Federal Railway Authority not required to report

The Federal Railway Administration has right to DB Netz AG is obliged to provide information, in order to check whether the Group the German Railways owned railway infrastructure companies in Contradiction has transferred to the general provisions of the Railway Act in public funds to rail transport division of the Group. This has the Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig decided today.

As evidenced by the Annual Report 2006 of the DB Group received the applicant, DB Netz AG, and two other railway infrastructure company of the Group in 2006, investment grants in a total amount of € 3.683 billion, which accounted for the applicant € 3.226 billion. After the textual explanations of these figures, it was the one to grants from third parties, on the other, federal grants and grants from the European Union. In the annual report 2005 of DB Group were the grants but not certain Business been assigned to the DB Group, stated, moreover, but according to their amounts in a nuanced way. On demand of the authorities responsible for the Railway Inspectorate Federal Railway Office, the applicant filed initially before a statement in which the grants for the year 2006 in accordance with the description in the 2005 Annual Report were broken. The Federal Railway Office asked now, however, a further breakdown of the subsidies by third parties for donors and projects. After the applicant had refused this request, gave her to the Federal Railway Office by a formal decision to grant the appropriate information.

The Federal Railway Office took the legal position that the information contained in the General Railway Act obligations on railway companies, the supervisory authorities to provide for the implementation of supervision necessary information, the authority of the regulatory authorities to demand the information through an enforceable decision. This has the applicant against the decision called the Cologne Administrative Court Interpretation Office of the Federal Railway connected and dismissed the action, whereas the Upper Administrative Court denies such a power, authority and supervision of the Appeal the applicant the information notice is lifted.

The Federal Administrative Court of Revision of Railroad Federal Office upheld and found that the information legally defined duties of railway companies are facing the powers appropriate regulatory authorities for information collection sovereign. This understanding reflects the will of the legislator and the purpose of the Act. The Federal Railway Office to be placed accordingly in a position to get the necessary information for its monitoring mission in the most simple, effective, yet effective manner that ensures legal protection – to give – just by the adoption of enforceable information modesty.

Murder of her husband by an overdose of morphine?

For a 35-year-old doctor from Aachen was before the district court in Aachen on suspicion of murder charges levied. According to the indictment, the woman her husband 50 years earlier by a lethal dose of the painkiller morphine murdered. A possible motive could be, according to previous investigations, a new friend and a new job.
After administration, the syringe should have called an ambulance the woman. This was on the death certificate the cause of death was unclear, so that forensic scientists and police were on. The autopsy revealed that the man verstab from an overdose of morphine.

The division of the district court jury has to decide on the opening of main proceedings. The woman sits in over two months in custody. If convicted of murder threatens her a life sentence.

DAV sues Allianz Insurance

Berlin (DAV). As the newest product, Allianz Versicherungs-AG, the “fair play” concept used to simplify the settlement of claims. In it, the workshops must first use one of the Alliance Framework Agreement . complete By this Treaty, the workshops will be far-reaching obligations imposed under the injury determination, including the determination of injury according to strict specifications to optimize costs.

They should also release a short-term workshops to repair within a few hours and the payment of Repair costs received within seven days. According to the Traffic Law attorneys of the German Bar Association (DAV), this approach is anti-competitive. Prerequisite for the determination by the “Fair Play” concept is that a Lawyer or an independent expert is not called. The workshop is oriented to the opposing insurance, rather than solely to meet the best of our knowledge and belief, the repair order to the customer.

“Ultimately, the workshop will be led to breach of contract against the victim. The concept is so not fair, but foul, so that even the name of fair play concept ‘is misleading and therefore anti-competitive, “said lawyer Jörg Elsner, chairman of the DAV-Traffic Law Association. Therefore, he had the Allianz Versicherungs-AG for the use of so-called “fair play” concept before the District Court I sued Munich.

To Grounds the competitive nature of the concept of the Alliance performs Elsner: “The concept includes consider a boycott of lawyers and attorneys. While each customer could continue to hire a lawyer, but then takes over the handling of the workshop is not as far – so well with periods of weeks rather than days or hours and Debate to the extent of damage and others. ”

The right to hire a lawyer, stand to each, one must admit, this can be a victim not only of the alliance. Recognizable, the concept should be applied to draw the workshop and warehouse of insurance. Instead of serving only the interests of customers, “hurdy-gurdy” it behind the back of the customer with the opposing insurer “rum”. When the lawyers would be prohibited by law.

Thus, the workshop in a growing conflict of interest would be brought, on the one hand it is contractually committed to the alliance, but also the other victims as part of the repair order. The lawyers is to represent conflicting interests is not criminally prohibited without reason.

2-year sentence for the main accused in the “meat scandal”

The district court of Augsburg, the principal defendants because a commercial fraud sentenced to two years imprisonment without parole.

The meat producer had been charged despite a ban on commercial mislabeled 130 tons of meat and sold it to kebab stands. He sought the assistance of two business partners. Altogether it was in the opinion of 22 cases, which was not brought in for edible meat into circulation. Here, the defendant and his business partners have converted about 150,000 €. The fact was discovered by a truck driver who spotted the man in changing the labels and then alerted the authorities.
Although the court emphasized that the meat was not harmful. However, the judges scored negatively, that the accused did not stop despite the trade ban. Between the court, prosecutor and defense held a consultation process that required the confession of the accused. Then asked both the prosecution and defense of a 2-year sentence.

This demand came to the court. Because of the length of the proceedings three months are regarded as already fully stretched. The process was very stressful for the man, he suffered two heart attacks during this period.
The participating business partners of the main defendants were sentenced to probation.