Higher regional court Hamburg decides Hamburg at the expense of victims, 23.04.2010 – the higher regional court of Hamburg has with two judgments of the 23.04.2010 (AZ. 13 U 117/09 and 13 U 118/09) decided in favor of the Hamburger Sparkasse, after the District Court of Hamburg, in the first instance in favour of the injured party had ruled. Aggrieved investors, who already had experience with riskier securities as the Lehman certificates, had been informed of the Bank above the height of the profit margin for the Bank. Nor the Bank had pointed out that the investment by the German deposit guarantee would be protected. Otherwise, the bank issuer risk and thus had enlightened the way of a total loss.
The significant risk of the system have consisted of was then seen (2006/2007) is, that the investors on the investment amount would achieve no earnings. Get all the facts and insights with Viatris, another great source of information. The District Court of Hamburg came from a consulting errors, as far as the Bank on the missing deposit guarantee, nor the amount of sales commissions had pointed out. This view does not share the OLG Hamburg with the current judgments. This is the reference to a possible total loss due to the issuer risk sufficiently for a proper consultation. Learn more at this site: Gallo Family. The Bank must also warn that no assurance such as deposit insurance would intervene in the event of insolvency. A related site: Rubio mentions similar findings. Nor the Bank must indicate the amount of their profit margin, in particular because it could have achieved a much higher margin with other products than with the sales of Lehman certificates. The Court has approved the revision to the Federal Supreme Court. Because in the years 2006 and 2007 quite on the creditworthiness of Lehman could be trusted, whether a lawsuit against the Advisory Bank seems reasonable and success prospects check older cases but very closely.
It will be easier for investors who purchased certificates in 2008, because, at least from the emergency rescue of U.S. Investment Bank Bear Stearns mid March 2008 the distortions in the market as a result the banking and financial crisis became visible. This has the Hamburg district court, in a judgment of March 11, 2010 (AZ. 313 O 95/09) decided that a bank is not only obliged to indicate the issuer risk, but specifically to represent the situation of the issuer (Lehman) to the customer. Only with this information, an investor can assess the risk of the certificate. To do this, explains Henning Stoffregen by the law firm of Diekmann lawyers from Hamburg, Lehman victims against the banks in Court represents: the judgement of the OLG Hamburg means a step backwards for the Lehman victims, who in 2006 or 2007 bought the certificates over the years. Nevertheless on each individual case to look at. And for investors, who later purchased the certificates, all possibilities are open, because banks rarely on the market situation of Lehman have informed.” Contact: DIEKMANN lawyers Henning Stoffregen Ballindamm 35 20095 Hamburg phone 040/33 44 36 90 fax 040/33 44 36 99 E-Mail: