There is hardly a colleague or a colleague who had been attached to his lawyer in life is not already in the PKH process. This should naturally apply in particular to all those who work on cases in the social, labor and family law.
date was also considered that with the onset of formal legal force of the pending proceedings within the meaning of § 172, para 1 CCP ended. The subsequent legal aid- review procedures, in which the PKH-owner personally or over a period of four years for the possible change their personal and economic relations were written, was considered as a separate administrative procedure, to which already the legal scope of power of attorney in accordance. § 81 ZPO did not cover.
accumulate Now here the cases in which we are written as a (former) Deputy represented DIRECTLY by the court with a request to inform whether the personal and economic circumstances of clients have changed.
In cases where the client relationship for other reasons as yet, this may seem straightforward, but at least also with overtime and extra costs are connected. In many cases, however, absolutely no contact is more to the client so that investigations are likely to make significant time and cost intensive.
A friendly note now brought us to a decision of the BGH of 12.08.2010 (ref. XII ZB 151/10), made it clear in which the Supreme Court that Deputy Attorneys also the legal aid review procedures for old accompany clients to have full and thus, for example, deliveries are made. Substance
this process is to economic reasons and the fact that this so in the sense of personal autonomy is.
From a practical point of view this is incomprehensible.
The settlement worked out the view here in the past very well, (relatively rare) Questions were answered by the client are granted.
now it is likely regardless of the legal profession, resulting from significant extra effort not just be in the interests of the courts where the procedure will be the future of the (former) lawyer. This will not only prolong the processing and response times considerably, but in cases where no more contact with former clients there is cause in the courts significantly more work, since these are ultimately likely to yet again have to apply directly to the claimant. Or must be closed from this decision of the Supreme Court, that any address inquiries to be carried out, etc. from the attorney on his own account?
How is this handled in other jurisdictions and who has already had experience in this direction? Your comments We would be very happy!
0 comments:
Post a Comment