Bei bloßer relativer Anwaltspflicht ist kein Einvernehmensrechtsanwalt erforderlich (OGH vom 18.02.2015, 3 Ob 210/14z)
Wednesday, May 27th, 2015Sorry, this entry is only available in Deutsch.
Mag. Elke Novak-Rabenseifner, Rechtsanwältin Meinhard Novak, Rechtsanwalts GmbH |
||||
Karlsplatz 3/6 1010 Wien |
T +43 (0) 1 890 20 12 – 0 F +43 (0) 1 890 20 12 – 11 |
E office@novakra.at W www.novakra.at |
Sorry, this entry is only available in Deutsch.
Sorry, this entry is only available in Deutsch.
Sorry, this entry is only available in Deutsch.
Personal and professional competence are the main criteria for a doctor’s contract. Occupation as settled doctor, doctor’s office representative or employed doctor are considered equivalent.
Newspapers are allowed to advertise in comparison to other papers in a good way, it is not allowed to ascribe others to bad journalism.
Comparative advertisement is only admissable if it relates to essential, relevant, verifiable and representative features of the goods or services concerned but the objectivity bid forbids non verifiable features. Therefore the advertisement comparison can relate to the different economic success of both newspapers, but not on any unverifiable negative judgement.
A registered right of residence does not oblige the owner to take the running costs (e.g. heating, electricity, cleaning …).
On cancellation of a donation based on severe ungratefulness a reassignment is valid even if there is a registered disposal prohibition.
If a shop assistant who slides a transportation vehicle does not observe the needed safety distance to a customer and the customer gets hurt – even if he/she acts unmindful – the shop assistant carries at least a contributory negligence.
The damage claim remains even if the shop assistant warned the customer acoustically if it is not noticeable that the customer actually perceived the warning.
A severe negligence of the liable party is needed to demand damage claim based on a “shock loss”. The prevention of the visitation right between den divorced parties does not count as a reason since the child was taken good care of at the other parental unit.
Since the beginning of the year the name of the recipient does no longer count as customer identification just the IBAN is controlled by the bank.
Therefore the bank is not liable if the transfer fails through a defective recipient name.