© alswart – fotolia.com
The Regional Court of Hamburg (LG Hamburg, Urteil v. 15.12.2017, Az. 324 O 84/17, nicht rechtskräftig) has prohibited Bayrischer Rundfunk from reporting on alleged investigation proceedings.
This prohibits both the broadcaster and the author of the report from claiming on the website www.br.de that “criminal proceedings” are being taken against a company or its founder.
You could face a fine of up to €250,000 or imprisonment
In the event of non-compliance, a fine of up to € 250,000 or up to six months’ imprisonment may be imposed.
The decision was made by way of a main proceedings by way of judgment. This became necessary even though the BR’s conduct had already been prohibited by means of a temporary injunction. The BR did not want to accept the urgent decision and forced the applicant to bring an action on the merits. Probably in the hope that the person concerned would run out of money.
Bayerischer Rundfunk can still appeal against the decision.
The broadcaster had “prettied up” its story
The Hamburg Regional Court followed the plaintiff’s argument that the allegation that criminal proceedings were being taken against the company or its founder was inaccurate. This was because the alleged investigation proceedings mentioned in the report – which the readers of the relevant article were not informed of – were, contrary to what was claimed, not directed against a specific person, let alone a specific company (which by its very nature does not work under criminal law, as criminal law deals with the guilt of natural persons), but simply against persons unknown. A clear violation of personal rights.
A preliminary investigation always works
In addition, in the present case, the person concerned only found out about the alleged investigation proceedings from the report in question and otherwise had no knowledge of it at all. Filing (anonymous) criminal charges (against persons unknown) is a perfidious trick that is often used. It is not uncommon for the media themselves to produce the (explosive) material that turns an everyday and therefore boring event into a story.
In addition, in the present case, the person concerned only found out about the alleged investigation proceedings from the report in question and otherwise had no knowledge of it at all. Filing (anonymous) criminal charges (against persons unknown) is a perfidious trick that is often used. It is not uncommon for the media themselves to produce the (explosive) material that turns an everyday and therefore boring event into a story.
Lawyer Arno Lampmann from the law firm LHR:
“As a public broadcaster with public funds and a statutory mandate, it is under a particular obligation to exercise restraint and diligence. Against the background of the diffuse presentation of the facts, it is therefore incomprehensible that the article made it onto the website of the well-known broadcaster at all.
The public broadcaster is obviously well aware of its financial power, even in legal disputes. In any case, it is remarkable that after a letter detailing the falsity of the allegations and a preliminary injunction procedure in which the illegality of the report is confirmed by the court, the broadcaster does not immediately admit its mistake, remove the article and undertake to cease and desist, but instead embarks on court proceedings that are extremely financially burdensome for an “ordinary citizen”.”
Disclosure: Our law firm represented the applicant.
Related posts
