Lawyer for procedural law: urgent proceedings and litigation PR

Civil litigation with a commercial objective: keeping submissions, evidence, pressure and reputation under control

Quick start: what is your matter about?

Your contact: Andreas Buchholz

Partner and Fachanwalt für IT-Recht (certified specialist lawyer for IT law), procedural law expert at ITMR.

Request a litigation mandate

What happens after your enquiry?

After your enquiry, we will get back to you within 24 hours on working days. The first contact is free of charge. Before any costs arise for you, we will inform you expressly.

1. A short description is enough. Describe the state of the dispute, deadlines and the opposing party. Pleadings, correspondence and supporting documents are helpful.
2. Receipt and initial sorting. We assess the enquiry on the basis of the project described, the documents and the apparent goal. Deadlines and dates should be clearly recognisable.
3. Suitable starting point and cost range. We clarify whether an initial consultation, a service package or a specific mandate is the next step. As soon as the scope of the review is clear, we tell you the cost range – before work begins.

Typical cases from our practice

The following scenarios are abstracted and simplified. Which solution holds up always depends on the specific facts and the contractual situation.

What you will have at the end

What civil procedure law is actually about

This means the judicial enforcement and defence of private law claims between professional market participants. It covers actions and defence against actions, interim relief, protective letters, independent evidence proceedings, appeals, settlements, cost management and the enforcement perspective.

This procedural perspective becomes particularly relevant in

• acute injunction and urgency conflicts, for example a preliminary injunction,
• digital matters involving platforms, data or accounts, for example in IT law, data law, data protection law or privacy litigation,
• disputes close to intellectual property and competition in trade mark law, trade mark litigation, copyright law and competition law,
• media and reputation-related conflicts in media law, press law, social media law and reputation protection.

Not decisive is a merely abstract overview of all jurisdictions. What matters is business-related civil litigation. That is where it becomes clear whether a claim exists substantively and can also be properly asserted, denied, proven and ultimately exploited commercially in procedural terms.

The basic procedural order follows above all the Zivilprozessordnung (ZPO, German Code of Civil Procedure) (opens in a new tab) and the Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz (GVG, German Courts Constitution Act) (opens in a new tab). For court practice, this means: the case must be conducted so that application, statement of facts, offer of evidence, court notices, settlement options and later enforcement work as one.

Doctrinal guiding principles of civil procedure

Strong civil litigation starts with the fundamental procedural principles rather than with buzzwords. Anyone who masters them recognises earlier where a case holds up, where submissions need to be sharpened and where a seemingly good claim remains too narrow in the proceedings.

Party control

Dispositionsmaxime (principle of party disposition) and being bound by the application: The court decides within the parties' applications and not freely on what it considers appropriate. Depth of the application, operative part, scope and enforceability must therefore be thought through precisely at an early stage. Central is Section 308 ZPO (opens in a new tab).

Statement of facts

Verhandlungs- und Beibringungsgrundsatz (adversarial principle): Civil proceedings depend on what the parties introduce into the proceedings. Submissions must be complete, orderly and truthful. The starting point is Section 138 ZPO (opens in a new tab). Anyone who does not properly prepare documentation, screenshots, logs, clearances or versions in technically driven conflicts often loses already at the level of the core facts.

Judicial management

Substantive case management and the right to be heard: The court must discuss aspects relevant to the decision with the parties and give notice if submissions are recognisably insufficient. Decisive are Section 139 ZPO (opens in a new tab) and Article 103(1) of the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany (GG) (opens in a new tab). Good litigation takes up judicial notices precisely instead of merely administering them.

Law of evidence

Burden of presentation and burden of proof: Not every substantively good position is procedurally strong. Anyone who has to prove a circumstance needs a conclusive statement of facts and a viable offer of evidence. For the court's formation of conviction, Section 286 ZPO (opens in a new tab) is central, and for the estimation of damages often Section 287 ZPO (opens in a new tab).

Urgent proceedings

Distinguishing full proof and Glaubhaftmachung (prima facie showing): In main proceedings, the case only holds up with a robust statement of facts and evidence. In interim relief, by contrast, a prima facie showing is often sufficient. Decisive is Section 294 ZPO (opens in a new tab). This difference is enormous in practice: what suffices for an injunction does not necessarily have the same standing in the main proceedings. Our Legal Evidence Builder for preserving evidence shows how to secure evidence in a usable way at an early stage.

Resilience across instances

Mandatory legal representation, appeals, enforcement perspective: Before regional courts and higher regional courts, representation by a lawyer is mandatory. Strategic litigation must therefore be designed from the outset to hold up across instances, focused on obtaining an enforceable title and commercially sound. The basics can be found in Section 78 ZPO (opens in a new tab) and, for appeals, in Section 511 ZPO (opens in a new tab).

Particularly important in complex commercial and digital conflicts: A secondary burden of presentation can intensify the obligation to make submissions without simply reversing the actual burden of proof. Precisely for this reason, internal processes, technical systems, clearances, roles and documentation must be organised early so that facts that hold up in court emerge.

Strategic litigation begins before the first pleading

Good litigation comes from preparation. The strongest appearance at the hearing is of little help if jurisdiction, standing, structure of the applications, evidence or commercial objective are only clarified under time pressure. Anyone wanting to conduct civil proceedings must therefore organise the case earlier than many of those involved assume.

• Separate claim and objective: Not every substantively existing claim is the commercially right litigation objective. Injunction, information, performance, damages, release, deletion or toleration require different procedural architectures.
• Clarify parties and roles properly: Standing to sue and to be sued, group relationships, platform roles, agency constellations, licence chains, responsibility of several parties and third-party notices must be sorted out early.
• Build a robust matrix of facts: Contracts, amendments, tickets, e-mails, clearances, notice-and-takedown communication, screenshots, export files, domain and account data, version histories and log files must be organised so that submissions and denials remain viable.
• Anticipate counter-submissions: Successful litigation considers its own line of claims and equally the other side's objections, denials, alternative causal chains, limitation objections, defences, jurisdictional attacks and evidence problems.
• Assess costs, time and pressure points: Value in dispute, enforcement consequences, market windows, supply chains, product launch, investor perspective, platform reactions and insurance cover are part of the procedural decision.
• Do not confuse settlement with giving in: In many mandates, the strongest lever lies in a precisely prepared settlement, staged enforcement of claims or a partial action that puts high pressure on the other side.

Typical mistakes in corporate litigation: escalating too early without a clean evidential basis, too sweeping denials, vague injunction applications, a weak jurisdiction strategy, no separation between main and urgent proceedings and the misconception that a substantively convincing position will prevail in the proceedings on its own.

In technology-related mandates, there is a further point: evidence is often volatile. Platform interfaces change, posts are deleted, rankings flip, accounts are moved, server data rotates. Especially there, forensic experience pays off early.

Action, interim relief, preservation of evidence and appeals

Civil procedure offers different tools. Not every conflict requires the same escalation. Decisive are urgency, evidence, reversibility of consequences, communication risk and whether the case is first to be secured or already finally decided.

Main proceedings

Action: Anyone going into main proceedings needs a conclusive claim and a statement of facts that is legally correct and at the same time provable. The basic procedural form of the statement of claim is set out in Section 253 ZPO (opens in a new tab). In business-related disputes, the precision of the first version often determines how pressure develops further. Our case visualizer illustrates how a mandate typically runs from enquiry to result.

Urgent proceedings

Preliminary injunction: Where a current infringement must be stopped quickly, urgent proceedings can be the right route. The statutory starting point is Section 935 ZPO (opens in a new tab) and Section 940 ZPO (opens in a new tab). However, the measure only holds up if claim for an injunction, urgency, wording of the application and prima facie showing fit together. For specific in-depth information, the next step leads to preliminary injunction.

Preservation of evidence

Selbständiges Beweisverfahren (independent evidence proceedings): If evidence threatens to disappear or technical conditions must be clarified in advance, independent evidence proceedings can be strategically valuable. Decisive is Section 485 ZPO (opens in a new tab). Especially in technically driven constellations, the instrument is often stronger than many companies initially assume.

Appeals

Appeal and course of instances: A first-instance judgment does not automatically lead to the next round. An appeal requires a clean analysis of errors, a realistic objective and a sober assessment of time, costs, enforcement consequences and settlement windows. Anyone continuing only out of frustration often produces additional costs without real gain.

Particular caution in interim relief: Anyone obtaining a preliminary injunction must consider the flip side. If the measure later proves to have been unjustified from the outset, liability for damages may arise under Section 945 ZPO (opens in a new tab). The quick application is therefore only strong if the factual basis is equally strong.

Where the substantive core can be narrowed down, the more specialised routes often work better: privacy litigation for contentious data protection situations, trade mark litigation for online infringements close to intellectual property rights, competition law for market conduct conflicts and dispute resolution and mediation for negotiated outcomes where confidentiality or the relationship matters.

Using litigation PR with a sense of proportion

Litigation public relations is strategic communication around ongoing or threatened proceedings. It does not replace litigation and is not meant to address courts via the media. Its purpose is the orderly addressing of the public, stakeholders, business partners, staff, platforms or the press when a legal dispute also triggers consequences for reputation, sales or the market.

Increased relevance exists, for example, in

• high-profile proceedings in media law and press law,
• reputation attacks, fake profiles, review and account conflicts in reputation protection and social media law,
• data, security and governance situations in cybersecurity law, compliance or data protection law,
• platform-related disputes in which the Digital Services Act (DSA) (opens in a new tab) plays a direct or indirect role.

Restraint is often the better choice if a case has no real public dimension, the factual basis is not yet stable or additional communication only creates new reach for the allegation. Where a Streisand effect threatens, every communicative step must be weighed against its procedural benefit.

This is why litigation PR is understood here as a special module: where the public is actually part of the negotiation, the case needs clear messaging. Where discretion, ability to settle or calm proceedings prevail, communication deliberately remains in the background.

Interfaces with specialist fields

Many civil proceedings only appear on the surface to be purely about procedural law. In reality, success often depends on a core area of substantive law. Where this focus can be narrowed and sharpened, going directly to the relevant practice area makes sense.

Key terms

Dispositionsmaxime (principle of party disposition)

The court is bound by the parties' applications.

Glaubhaftmachung (prima facie showing)

Standard of proof in interim relief under Section 294 ZPO.

Schutzschrift (protective letter)

Precautionary pleading against an expected preliminary injunction.

Litigation PR

Communication surrounding a legal dispute.

These terms explain the language used on this page. What matters is always the specific individual case.

Provisions and reliable sources

The following statutory provisions and regulations are cited on this page.

Articles on urgent proceedings and litigation PR

These articles deal with the procedural and communication questions that need to be clarified early in disputes.

Frequently asked questions from companies on civil litigation

Litigation mandates are rarely just about winning or losing. Often it is about timing, evidence, level of escalation, depth of applications, settlement pressure and how much publicity a case can bear.

Forensic introduction

Civil litigation requires substance, timing and clear leadership