Legal aid in Germany

Last updated

Legal aid in Germany is "embedded in the court system and is seen as a part of this". [1] Germany was the first country to provide free legal aid representation for the poor in 1919, [2] and represents the archetype of the so-called judicare system. [3]

Contents

Legal aid can be provided in civil (which includes family law), administrative, labour, social welfare and even constitutional disputes before courts if a party is not in a position to pay court and counsel fees. [4] Legal aid is provided by exemption from court costs and payment of counsel fees from the state budget upon decision by the court. The amount provided in legal aid cases paid to the lawyer is regulated in a statutory fee schedule, but considerably lower than counsel could normally claim according to the regular fee table from a client who is not entitled to legal aid. The German Code of Civil Procedure provided a subsection entitled "the right of the poor" (in German: Armenrecht) to which on 1 January 1980 was added the first German law of the public funding for the coverage of legal expenses related the access to the judicial protection and the conducting of the process. [5]

The granting of legal aid by the court requires that the applicant proves that (a) the claimant is economically not able to bear the costs of the procedures, (b) the lawsuit has a reasonable prospects of success, and (c) the cause of action is not frivolous. [6] The application for legal aid is typically lodged together with the draft of the complaint with the bench of the competent court. This has the advantage that the legal aid applicant is provisionally relieved of the payment of the court costs while the bench not only reviews the applicant's economic status but also determines the merits of the case, i.e., as to whether the lawsuit appears to have reasonable prospect of success, based merely on the facts and arguments as presented in the draft complaint. Thus, a summary review of the cause of action is carried out by the court. Only if all conditions are met and legal aid thus granted will the court communicate the complaint to the other party and the judicial dispute thereby commences with the costs borne by the court. However, the litigant seeking legal aid can also lodge effectively the complaint together with auxiliary legal aid request but without making the pendency of the case dependent on the court granting legal aid; or the litigant requests legal aid support at a later stage but before completion of the case procedures. In the latter scenarios, if legal aid is rejected by the court the litigant, who sought legal aid, will bear the counsel and court fees if the lawsuit is unsuccessful (or will bear the costs partially if the suit is partially successful). Defence cases are treated equivalently.

The German judicare system leads to the review of legal aid cases on indigence and their merits first by the lawyers in private practice, then the courts, while averting dependence on external legal aid institutions removed from the judicial process. Another element of strength lies in the system's low cost. [7] Altogether smaller amounts of state budgets are provided for legal aid per capita compared with other European countries. [8] To secure receiving their fees through legal aid, lawyers' drafted briefs must have arguable merit thereby ensuring the high quality of representation of indigents. The substandard performance of lawyers is therefore not an option. The German model is also considered to put the indigent litigant on genuine equality with a wealthy litigant. [9] The indigent has the same right to choose a lawyer as a more affluent person. The lawyer representing the indigent is naturally motivated to win the case, since as a victorious party the lawyer is entitled to recover the full lawyer's fees, i.e., not just the reduced legal aid fees, from the party that loses the case. [10] The loser-pays-all system constitutes an incentive for lawyers to represent indigent clients. [10]

In criminal procedures, the court assigns an accused with a defence counsel in so-called "necessary defence" [11] cases if the accused has not already retained a lawyer. In practice, however, the court usually appoints the lawyer which the accused had already chosen for mandatory representation. [12] Necessary defence means that the accused is charged with a felony that is punishable by a minimum sentence of one year's imprisonment, is tried before a higher court, already is detained on remand or otherwise not considered able to defend himself or herself. [13] The entitlement of an accused to have counsel assigned in cases of mandatory legal representation is irrespective of indigence. [14] The court-assigned defence lawyer is entitled to claim fees from the state budget. Like in civil proceedings, however, the legal aid fees are lower than fees the lawyer could otherwise claim from the client. [14] Every lawyer can be appointed by the court as a public defender scheme does not exist in Germany. [15] If the accused loses the case, i.e., is convicted, the court imposes the court fees and the costs of defence on the defendant. After conviction, the court-appointed lawyer can choose whether to execute a claim against the convicted client or the treasury. Normally, if the client is indigent, the lawyer will seek payment from the solvent debtor, the state. [16] If a case does not require "necessary defence", an accused, who cannot pay a lawyer, is not entitled to be provided with counsel paid by the state but must defend himself or herself.

Related Research Articles

The adversarial system or adversary system is a legal system used in the common law countries where two advocates represent their parties' case or position before an impartial person or group of people, usually a judge or jury, who attempt to determine the truth and pass judgment accordingly. It is in contrast to the inquisitorial system used in some civil law systems where a judge investigates the case.

Barrister Lawyer specialised in court representation in England and Wales, and some other jurisdictions

A barrister is a type of lawyer in common law jurisdictions. Barristers mostly specialise in courtroom advocacy and litigation. Their tasks include taking cases in superior courts and tribunals, drafting legal pleadings, researching the philosophy, hypothesis and history of law, and giving expert legal opinions.

In legal terminology, a complaint is any formal legal document that sets out the facts and legal reasons that the filing party or parties believes are sufficient to support a claim against the party or parties against whom the claim is brought that entitles the plaintiff(s) to a remedy. For example, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) that govern civil litigation in United States courts provide that a civil action is commenced with the filing or service of a pleading called a complaint. Civil court rules in states that have incorporated the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure use the same term for the same pleading.

Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires U.S. states to provide attorneys to criminal defendants who are unable to afford their own. The case extended the right to counsel, which had been found under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to impose requirements on the federal government, by imposing those requirements upon the states as well.

In English civil litigation, costs are the lawyers' fees and disbursements of the parties.

Legal aid is the provision of assistance to people who are unable to afford legal representation and access to the court system. Legal aid is regarded as central in providing access to justice by ensuring equality before the law, the right to counsel and the right to a fair trial. This article describes the development of legal aid and its principles, primarily as known in Europe, the Commonwealth of Nations and in the United States.

In England and Wales, a litigant in person is an individual, company or organisation that has rights of audience and is not represented in a court of England and Wales by a solicitor or barrister. Instructing a barrister and not a solicitor, for example through the Public Access Scheme, however, does not prevent the party on whose behalf the barrister had been instructed from being a litigant in person.

A public defender is a lawyer appointed to represent people who otherwise cannot reasonably afford to hire a lawyer to defend themselves in a trial. Several countries, including the UK, Hungary and Singapore, and some states of Australia, provide people with public defenders. Brazil is the only country in which an office of government-paid lawyers with the specific purpose of providing full legal assistance and representation to the needy free of charge is established in the constitution. The Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution requires the US government to provide free legal counsel to indigent defendants in criminal cases, and public defenders in the United States are full-time lawyers employed by or under contract with the state or federal governments.

In forma pauperis is a Latin legal term meaning "in the character or manner of a pauper". It refers to the ability of an indigent person to proceed in court without payment of the usual fees associated with a lawsuit or appeal.

<i>Dietrich v The Queen</i> Australian legal case

Dietrich v The Queen (Dietrich) was a 1992 decision of the High Court of Australia, which established a de facto constitutional requirement that legal aid be provided to defendants in serious criminal trials. The Court ruled adjournments should be granted on an indefinite basis in serious criminal trials where an accused is unrepresented "through no fault of their own", known as the "fair trial principle" and commonly referred to as the Dietrich principle. Prior to Dietrich it was customary in Australia to force to trial a person who could not afford legal representation.

Attorney's fee is a chiefly United States term for compensation for legal services performed by an attorney for a client, in or out of court. It may be an hourly, flat-rate or contingent fee. Recent studies suggest that when lawyers charge a flat-fee rather than billing by the hour, they work less hard on behalf of clients and clients get worse outcomes. Attorney fees are separate from fines, compensatory and punitive damages, and from court costs in a legal case. Under the "American rule", attorney fees are usually not paid by the losing party to the winning party in a case, except pursuant to specific statutory or contractual rights.

Right to counsel means a defendant has a right to have the assistance of counsel and, if the defendant cannot afford a lawyer, requires that the government appoint one or pay the defendant's legal expenses. The right to counsel is generally regarded as a constituent of the right to a fair trial. Historically, however, not all countries have always recognized the right to counsel. The right is often included in national constitutions. Of the 194 constitutions currently in force, 153 have language to this effect.

A duty solicitor, duty counsel, or duty lawyer, is a solicitor whose services are available to a person either suspected of, or charged with, a criminal offence free of charge, if that person does not have access to a solicitor of their own and usually if it is judged by a means test that they cannot afford one. The system is operative in several Commonwealth countries, including the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Canada.

In English law, a law costs draftsman is a specialist lawyer who settles the legal costs of a court case. The role of the law costs draftsman centres on a procedure known as the detailed assessment of costs, which is controlled by statute in England and Wales. They are concerned with costs relating to all areas of the law and deal with every conceivable type of legal matter that touches upon the subject of costs. An experienced and competent law costs professional may command a salary on a par with that of a solicitor or legal executive.

Legal Aid Ontario Canadian provincial legal aid organization

Legal Aid Ontario (LAO) is a publicly funded and publicly accountable non-profit corporation, responsible for administering the legal aid program in the province of Ontario, Canada. Through a toll-free number and multiple in-person locations such as courthouse offices, duty counsel and community legal clinics, the organization provides more than one million assists to low-income Ontario residents each year.

Pro se legal representation comes from Latin pro se, meaning "for oneself" or "on behalf of themselves", which in modern law means to argue on one's own behalf in a legal proceeding as a defendant or plaintiff in civil cases or a defendant in criminal cases.

Legal aid in the United States is the provision of assistance to people who are unable to afford legal representation and access to the court system in the United States. In the US, legal aid provisions are different for criminal law and civil law. Criminal legal aid with legal representation is guaranteed to defendants under criminal prosecution who cannot afford to hire an attorney. Civil legal aid is not guaranteed under federal law, but is provided by a variety of public interest law firms and community legal clinics for free or at reduced cost. Other forms of civil legal aid are available through federally-funded legal services, pro bono lawyers, and private volunteers.

A poor person is a legal status in many countries in the world that allows an individual to have fair court even if he/she does not have enough financial savings. If a judge believes that the accused person is without the financial resources to pay the costs of a court action or proceeding, he/she may apply for in forma pauperis (IFP) status. It is a Latin term for "in the manner of a pauper," which describes a litigant who is excused by a court from paying filing fees and court costs because she cannot afford to do so.

The Assistance of Counsel Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right...to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

In the United States, a public defender is an attorney-at-law appointed by the courts and provided by the state or federal governments to represent and advise those who cannot afford to hire a private attorney. Public defenders are full-time attorneys employed by the state or federal governments. The public defender program is one of several types of criminal legal aid in the United States.

References

  1. ↑ Barendrecht, Maurits (2005). Legal Aid in Europe. Nine different Ways to Guarantee Access to Justice? (PDF). HiiL innovating justice. p. 85. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-02-02. Retrieved 2016-07-27.
  2. ↑ Yuthayotin, Sutatip (2014). Access to Justice in Transnational B2C E-Commerce: A Multidimensional Analysis of Consumer Protection Mechanisms. p. 41.
  3. ↑ Schlesinger, Rudolf B. (1977). The German Alternative: A Legal Aid System of Equal Access to the Private Attorney. Cornell International Law Journal. p. 213.
  4. ↑ See sec. 114 of the German civil procedure code (ZPO)
  5. ↑ Breig, Burkhard (2019). "Legal aid in Germany" (PDF). Pravoprimenenie (in English and Russian). Dostoevsky Omsk State University. 3 (4): 105–113. doi: 10.24147/2542-1514.2019.3(4).105-113 . ISSN   2542-1514. OCLC   1045637572 . Retrieved October 1, 2020– via DOAJ.{{cite journal}}: External link in |via= (help)
  6. ↑ Sec. 114 para. 1 ZPO
  7. ↑ Schlesinger, The German Alternative, p. 215
  8. ↑ Barendrecht, Legal Aid in Europe, p. 49-54
  9. ↑ Schlesinger, The German Alternative, p. 217
  10. 1 2 Schlesinger, The German Alternative, p. 216
  11. ↑ See section 140 (1) of the German Code of Criminal Procedure
  12. ↑ D. Brodowski; C. Burchard; N. Kotzurek; J. Rauber; J. Vogel (2010). Effective Criminal Defence in Europe, Chapter 7 Germany. Intersentia. p. 10.
  13. ↑ Section 140 (1) CCP
  14. 1 2 Brodowski et al., Effective Criminal Defence in Europe, p. 11
  15. ↑ Brodowski et al., Effective Criminal Defence in Europe, p. 10
  16. ↑ Brodowski et al., Effective Criminal Defence in Europe, p. 12
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.