Out-of-court and court dispute resolution

The commercial, technical, legal, and socio-political framework is undergoing change in many areas of technology. Depending on their culture and industry, companies and their market competitors exercise different forms of conciliation, forbearance, commitment, and force in conflict resolution and dispute management. Legal disputes in the commercial sector are particularly likely to arise when the contractual partner or opposing party adopts a blocking stance, is in default or otherwise grossly in the wrong, and has committed breaches of duty and acts or omissions that justify withdrawal and/or damages, which are critical, nullify investments, and cannot simply be ignored or “written off.”

In practice, companies reach the limits of their business framework in trade, sales, drop shipping, and new business areas, particularly due to deficits and breaches of duty by contractual partners, customers, third parties, and/or supervisory authorities.

Even with the best corporate and contractual culture, depending on whether agreements are designed as (de-)escalation, mediation, dispute resolution, arbitration, arbitration tribunal, or jurisdiction clauses, business relationships can sometimes end up in the abysmal “minefield” of disputing parties and court.

The application of legally and economically sound strategies to manage and resolve conflicts – including critical and existential ones – is part of our basic repertoire. This is because we not only work outside of the courtroom, but also ensure sustainable litigation, both before arbitration tribunals and in the courts of law.

Many companies have already learned that understanding and sensibly or even elegantly navigating the national and international “legal jungle” can be an art in itself. This is especially true for deadlocked, contentious, and highly disputed projects that are considered failed and must be brought before the courts.