How difficult is the lawyer course

Introduction INTRODUCTION

Transcript

1 INTRODUCTION Introduction Hansjörg Staehle Attorney-at-Law President of the RAK Munich The Munich Bar Association, together with the other German Bar Associations, will be 125 years old. At least this is the case if one disregards an interruption in the continuity under the rule of injustice during the Nazi era. Without wanting to suppress the injustice of this time, this is allowed today. In retrospect, a continuous development of the self-governing legal profession can be seen since the chambers were founded by the Lawyers' Act within the framework of the Reich Justice Acts. For the 100th birthday in 1979, C.H. Beck Robert Heinrich's monograph 100 Years of the Munich Bar Association. Since then, 25 extremely eventful years have passed, reason enough to pause and look back. We have not chosen a new monograph for this, but a commemorative publication with contributions from various authors. They look at individual aspects and developments with very different temperaments and from different perspectives. And we have accepted that such a commemorative publication cannot lay claim to the completeness of a comprehensive presentation from the pen of a single author. Nevertheless, it is to be hoped that she will shed some light on what we have experienced for future generations. The Festschrift appears as a special edition of our Chamber's communications and thus fulfills a dual purpose, which made the Chamber Board of Directors resort to this unusual form of a Festschrift: On the one hand, we reach all members in the hope of offering them something special and interesting. On the other hand, this keeps the costs for printing and shipping within moderate limits. A good part of them would have accrued anyway if the messages had been output normally. So let's look at the past 25 years. The contribution of our Honorary President Jürgen F. Ernst A Quarter Century Munich Bar Association (p. 6 ff.) Promises you an overview. He also paid tribute to lawyers who have particularly shaped the image of our Chamber through their services (p. 30 ff.). Elisabeth Schwärzer has taken on the important role of female lawyers in the life of the Chamber (p. 37 ff.). As an older colleague you might be inclined to say: In 1979 the world was still all right! Was it really you? Let us remember: A legal profession characterized by sole proprietorships and law firms with a single-digit head count was busy working with a recognizable focus on forensic work. The general lawyer was the model. Specializations were rare, telling evidence of the devil. The electric rocker arm typewriter next to the Tippex bottle was making a noise in the secretary's office. Progressive colleagues had an IBM ball-head machine and very progressive ones even had a teleprinter, which was often banished to dark storage rooms because of its rattling. Advertising was strictly forbidden to the peers. The ban on advertising and critical statements in legal documents, sometimes marginal derailments, were essential items of professional supervision by the Chamber's Board of Directors. Not to forget the often petty monitoring of the legal profession for Hansjörg Staehle 1

2 INTRODUCTION Prevention of other activities: Second jobs were largely forbidden, especially any commercial activity. In retrospect, it is more of a picture of limitations in some respects. The legal profession had to move and develop if it wanted to meet the challenges of the years to come. And we lawyers should soon face such challenges in great numbers and force. The legal profession had long recognized that the entire breadth of the law increasingly overwhelmed the competence of the individual lawyer. In the first half of the eighties of the last century, the discussion in the large legal organizations culminated in the expansion of the specialist lawyer, which until then only knew the specialist lawyer for tax law. And the legislature made no progress in creating the legal basis for enlargement. A surprising liberation from the bar was the starting signal for a development that continues to this day. In the BRAK general meeting of October 1986, in addition to the specialist lawyer for tax law, three further specialist lawyer designations were approved on the fluctuating basis of the guideline competence of the BRAK general meeting (177 para. 2 sentence 2 BRAO, version at that time). Read about the prehistory and dynamic development of Uwe Clausen's contribution in this commemorative publication (p. 76 ff.). Another extremely important discussion for professional law began about 25 years ago: An increasingly supra-regional positioning of the commercial economy, a harbinger of the incipient internationalization and globalization, made the legal profession aware of the limits of locally restricted legal activity. The principle of restricting a partnership to a single location, undoubtedly a relic from the times when lawyers were fixated on their admissions court, was questioned when the question was received by the Federal Court of Justice, which signaled the green light for regional law firms (BGH NJW 1989, p. F). The BGH finally switched the traffic light to green through the fundamental decision of (BGHZ 119, 225 ff. Supra-local law firm). Incidentally, due to a competition process conducted by our chamber against a colleague. The Munich Bar Association was accused of hostility towards progress at the time. A reproach that is often repeated, which fails to recognize the duty of a corporation under public law to clarify the legal basis of the profession sine ira et studio. Particularly large chambers 25 years ago Munich was already the largest German chamber with around approx. Members and with around approx. The article by Kempter / Kopp Lawyers' Associations (pp. 84 ff.) Deals with the history of the supra-local partnership and the consequent further development for the corporation as well as the takeover of foreign company forms by German subdivisions of international law firms. And then of course it was the so-called Bastille decisions of the Federal Constitutional Court that made the legal profession startled with a loud bang. Two resolutions of the Federal Constitutional Court on the requirement of objectivity and the ban on advertising overturned the longstanding case law in which the determination of professional obligations in guidelines by the BRAK according to 177 (2) No. 2 BRAO was confirmed as constitutional. The basic right to exercise one's profession freely requires a democratic legitimation of restrictive regulations. The guidelines could only be applied for a transitional period, insofar as they were indispensable for maintaining the orderly administration of justice. Gerhard Hettinger vividly described the development of professional law in the run-up to the Bastille resolutions and the development since then in his article From professional law to professional law (p. 43 ff.) And particularly highlighted the Munich environment. 2 Hansjörg Staehle

3 INTRODUCTION I personally believe that, in retrospect, we owe thanks to the Federal Constitutional Court. Not only under the gowns of the professors, as the sixty-eight polemicized, but also under the attorney's robes, a muff had accumulated over the years. The Federal Constitutional Court has encouraged the legal profession to think in a new and fresh way. This is shown by the history of the constitutional assembly, which created a free and liberal professional order. We German lawyers can, in my opinion, show ourselves in the world. In the period that followed, the Federal Constitutional Court also had reason to give decisive impetus for a new adjustment of professional law. The second occupation decision from (BVerfG NJW 1993, p. 317 ff.) Is particularly significant. The incompatibility of admission to the bar with practicing (almost) all other professional activities gave way to the compatibility of admission to the bar with (almost) all other professions for constitutional reasons of freedom of action and professional freedom. In the chamber district, almost half of all newly admitted colleagues register a second job immediately or in the course of their first year of employment, sometimes without any recognizable reference to jurisprudence, from organic farmers to innkeepers. We know that the second job makes the difficult start-up phase of freelance legal work easier for many young colleagues (see Career Entry and Professional Success of Young Lawyers, Nuremberg, 2000). But we also know, and some may regret that, that the professional title of lawyer no longer allows a reliable conclusion to be drawn about the real livelihood of those concerned and their familiarity with the rules and requirements of the legal profession. A not entirely insignificant motive for being admitted to the bar in addition to a second job is the opportunity to become a member of the pension fund, which was established in Bavaria at the beginning of the eighties of the last century, largely driven by the unforgettable managing director of our chamber, Dr. Giselher Gralla, started to form and came into being on as Bayerische Rechtsanwaltsversorgung. Compared to employee insurance as a funded pension, it offers incomparably higher security and significantly higher benefits. Read the success story of the pension fund in Ottheinz Kääb's article on the pensions of lawyers (p. 104 ff.). The development towards supra-local and international law firms has to be seen against the background of strong supraregional and international interdependence of the economy. Another cause is the constant pressure and insistence on the part of the European legislator for deregulation for the purpose of the hoped-for liberation of the markets. These tendencies have also induced the German legislature to take a significant step by abolishing the traditional compulsory localization in civil matters, amending the 78 ZPO. It remains to be seen whether it was a step forward or whether the repeal will lead to a concentration of the legal profession in larger cities and thus to a negative development to the detriment of those seeking justice in rural areas. Obvious voices from rural areas of our chamber district report massive drops in sales due to the elimination of correspondence mandates. Others complain that the lawyers are frantic to travel across Germany to court hearings. However, the next step taken in 2002 was only consistent, through which all lawyers admitted to a German higher regional court were also able to postulate in all German higher regional courts. It also remains to be seen whether a current initiative by the European Commission to deregulate (also) the legal market, determined by purely economic considerations, will do justice to the special features of the legal profession. Regulation is not the same as regulation; for the administration of justice and the associated basic values ​​of Hansjörg Staehle 3

4 INTRODUCTION Legal profession, some regulations are essential. Eckhart Müller dealt with this problem in his article on the lawyer as an organ of the administration of justice (p. 64 ff.). And what is still ahead of us? Can we make ourselves comfortable in the thoroughly swept and cleared room of legal professional law? I'm afraid not. The next step is a far-reaching amendment to the Legal Advice Act, which was also largely initiated by Brussels. In the interests of consumers, it is to be hoped that unsuitable people will continue to be kept away from the sensitive market of legal advice in the future. In the interests of the legal profession, it must be demanded that a protected area of ​​professional activity remains as the basis for an economically sufficient existence. In the interests of the administration of justice, it must be postulated that legal advice should be left to the lawyer as an organ of administration of justice. Finally, let me come back to the everyday appearance of legal work, as I described it at the beginning, certainly a little exaggerated, for the time 25 years ago. What has changed? I mean almost everything. Today's lawyer, if he doesn't want to be a con man, has specialized, and the much-acclaimed general lawyer also has areas of activity in which he has particular expertise. Advertising references to special knowledge are permitted and may be disseminated in all media. The Internet in particular established itself as an information medium 25 years ago, a completely unknown phenomenon. The lawyer earns 70% of his turnover with consulting activities. There is no getting through without foreign languages. 29 European countries are open to the German legal profession. Far from all legal and professional framework conditions, a technological revolution has taken place in recent years, which has also profoundly changed the legal work. The computer has found its way into our offices. The paperwork has become significantly easier and the quality has improved. The networking of the PCs in the law firms gives us access to the entire documents of the partners and employees at any time. Digital copiers with multiple technical functions enable easy reproduction of required templates and systems. Finding decisions or papers online and offline has become a matter of moments. Fax and allow the effortless transport and joint processing of extensive designs via telecommunication. And with a mobile phone and notebook, the lawyer can be reached almost anywhere and anytime. These possibilities can considerably increase the quantity and quality of legal work, especially of course the speed of legal help, which is often important for the client. On the other hand, they harbor the dangers of increasing hectic pace and the hindrance of one's own creative thoughts. Quiet thought and considered action can fall by the wayside in favor of a constant hunt for even more relevant information and the even more appropriate prejudice. To say nothing of the escalating addiction to cover every insignificant point in the pleading with extensive appendices instead of mentally selecting and limiting oneself to the essentials. Not to mention the constant defensive struggle of the advising lawyer against the tendency of clients to bombard him at any time of the day or night with the help of multiple means of telecommunication with questions that require an immediate answer. So no unalloyed jubilation about the unstoppable progress. Only the statement that in just a quarter of a century, everyday life as a lawyer has changed more than ever before in such a short period of time. The still strong rush to the legal profession puts the self-image of the legal profession to the test. She will have to master this challenge with the means of a free, self-administered profession. Increasing the quality of legal services 4 Hansjörg Staehle

5 INTRODUCTION through targeted specialization and constant, verified advanced training as well as the creative development of new fields of activity can be suitable means for this. And the Munich Chamber? In the last quarter of a century it has developed into a powerful instrument of legal self-administration, as will soon be necessary for members. Lean and effective structures have drastically accelerated the approval process. Against the backdrop of rapid developments, the chamber has also changed its character. From the purely administrative supervisory authority to a helpful provider of important services for the interests of the members. This required a continuous development of the Executive Board's decision-making process, which took place in monthly plenary meetings and a large number of meetings of the Executive Board departments. You can find out more about the voluntary board members in the article Development of the Chamber (p. 17 ff.). It was therefore necessary to expand and reposition the Chamber's office, which today works at full steam with 35 employees, seven of whom are lawyers, as I was able to report to the Chamber Assembly in April 2004. Stephan Kopp presented the development of the office in his article (p. 24 ff.). We look forward to a contribution from the legal system in this commemorative publication (Sernetz and Radmann, p. 108 ff.). The authors rightly emphasize the necessary independence of the legal profession from the rest of the state's jurisdiction. The lawyers' jurisdiction thus makes an irreplaceable contribution to the self-image of the legal profession and secures its existence as an institution, without which access to the law would be closed to citizens today as it was 25 and 125 years ago. We cannot end this foreword without expressing our sincere thanks to the authors for their contributions to this Festschrift. Without exception, they have undertaken this laborious work voluntarily in order to present the problems, developments and foundations of our profession that affect all lawyers, things that are important to them.As without exception experienced experts, engaged in many honorary positions for many years, I think they have succeeded. It's hard to believe how much work we've done. It is exciting what is to come. May this commemorative publication help to classify both and may it bring fun and benefit to the colleagues. Munich in September 2004 Hansjörg Staehle President Hansjörg Staehle 5

6 A QUARTER CENTURY RAK MUNICH A quarter of a century Munich Bar Association () Dr. Jürgen F. Ernst Attorney Honorary President of the RAK Munich In 1979 the commemorative publication 100 Years of the Munich Bar Association was published, edited by Dr. Robert Heinrich, the second President of the Chamber after World War II. Guests from justice and business met for the ceremony in the Herkulessaal of the Munich Residence. The abolition of the state regulation of the legal profession and the resulting new freedom of access to the profession, freedom to practice the profession and freedom of self-administration of the profession was celebrated. The development towards the freedom of the lawyer, demanded by Rudolf Gneist in his work Free Advokatur, The first demand of all judicial reforms in Prussia in 1867, seemed to be complete. The expansion of the chamber also seemed to come to an end. This applied to the number of members of the Chamber, which in 1979 had reached an unprecedented high at 4900. The successor of Dr. Heinrich in office, my predecessor, Eckhard Warmuth, therefore closed his speech with a quote from Gneist: The excessive influx of people would deprive the entire profession of its reputation, dignity and decency. The inevitable consequence will be that the legal profession ceases to be an inviting career. Developments from 1979 onwards taught us otherwise; it is up to the readers to decide whether or not something better came of it. Changes and developments can only be measured by their effects. But the effects and their continued effects determine our current professional life. We experience these effects on our society, its rights and our jurisdiction. Effects that are not based exclusively on the constantly increasing number of lawyers, but are at least equally due to the change in the concept of freedom, freedom of access to the profession, freedom to practice the profession, freedom of self-administration of the profession. After overcoming the twelve years of state injustice and the entry into force of the Basic Law with its free democratic constitution in 1949, with the rule of law practiced from 1979, the development in the field of professional law also seemed to have been completed. Guidelines, drawn up by the Federal Bar Association in several revised versions, contained the principles of professional professional life. Professional approval and revocation continued to be carried out by the state judicial authorities. It was at this time that the Munich Chamber, due to the highest number of lawyers in its field, had to find new forms of organization for the self-administration of the legal profession. On the one hand, in order to be able to cope with the work involved, on the other hand, to ensure the principle of equal treatment of colleagues in professional supervision matters, and also to apply the same standards in approval and revocation procedures. The voluntary work of the Presidium and Board of Directors was not able to do it despite the division into departments and certain work areas. 6 Jürgen F. Ernst

7 A QUARTER CENTURY RAK MUNICH to ensure that the extensive work was carried out promptly. The necessary increase in the number of staff in the office then meant that the rooms in the Deutsche Bank building on Stachus, located directly on the way between Lenbachplatz and the Palace of Justice, had to be given up because they had become too small. A building at Landwehrstrasse 61 was rented. There the chamber remained highly valued as a tenant until she moved into her own chamber building in. A decisive prerequisite for the complete and prompt fulfillment of the chamber's tasks was the appointment of two fully qualified lawyers as professional managing directors. Such a position is not provided for in the BRAO; However, the setting was justified with the need for preparation on the one hand and the handling of the tasks to be performed or completed by the board on the other. In the meantime, no German chamber can manage without a full-time managing director. Growing numbers of lawyers and constantly growing tasks, some of which the Chamber of Munich has to deal with, led to the fact that the number of fully qualified lawyers in the office increased to seven in 2004 (five managing directors and two research assistants). The number of board members was increased from 32 to 34 in 1990, but has remained unchanged since then. The lack of legal regulation of a delimitation of the competencies between the board of directors and the presidium on the one hand and the professional managing directors on the other hand initially raised considerable concerns about how the cooperation would work out in the long term. The professional managing directors ran the office, were the first to process the incoming mail and then made the decision of their own accord as to which transactions were to be presented to the president or other members of the presidium or the board as a whole. Theoretical demarcation features did not prove helpful after a short time. It was thanks to the loyalty of the managing directors to the respective president that, with one single exception, there was never a disturbance in the relationship of trust between the management and the president or the presidium for over 25 years. The few changes in the office of president did not pose too much of a problem for the managing directors. At least as important as the good cooperation between the president and management was the mutual trust between the president and the respective chairmen of the individual departments, who, in accordance with the regulation in 77 (5) BRAO, made decisions in a large number of cases instead of the board of directors. In this area too, there was only one occasion in the course of this quarter of a century that the President had to intervene in the handling of departmental matters. In circles of colleagues, the opinion is often held that the board of the chamber deals largely only with itself, apart from fee reports and professional complaints against colleagues. Perhaps this idea is one of the reasons why, on the one hand, participation in the annual chamber meetings, in which account is given will remain so low over the past year, on the other hand there is hardly any interest shown by colleagues in being elected to the board for one or two legislative periods (the number of lawyers standing for election is only slightly higher for each election than the number of to choose). Those who were elected to the board quickly found interest in the work. The topics addressed and mostly discussed in the Board of Directors, which in many cases lead to a written elaboration or statement to the State Ministry of Justice, the Federal Bar Association or the other chambers or Jürgen F. Ernst 7

8 A QUARTER CENTURY RAK MUNICH led the pension providers, should therefore be briefly addressed. Anyone who has experienced the 25 years of development in the profession, followed the development of the profession, can infer from this that probably not a single topic that is important for the legal profession has not been discussed at least once in the 25 years. Certainly, the statements of the board of directors not only attracted attention from all addressees, but also contributed to the avoidance of undesirable results from a professional point of view, on the other hand, advocacy interests were taken into account beyond the original approach in laws and official measures. The weight of the chamber was very helpful here, as it was able to bring all the decisive aspects of legal life into the respective discussion not only because of its numerical size, but also because of the different structure from purely rural areas to large cities. In 1979 it turned out by chance that the freedom to practice as a lawyer had not yet been recognized everywhere. When inspecting his personal file, which was then kept at the Munich Higher Regional Court, a colleague found that all of his conversations with his clients over several months had been meticulously recorded and transcribed and made copies of these on behalf of the Ministry of the Interior Minutes had also been given to the colleague's personnel files. A visit by President Warmuth to the Ministry of Justice only revealed that the Ministry of Justice regretted this process, but saw no way of preventing the so-called state security authorities from taking such measures. The reason for the wiretapping is alleged to have been communist activities on the part of the colleague. All attempts to obtain a binding declaration that such wiretapping measures in the future, if not neglected, then only after the approval of the chamber, were unsuccessful. Nevertheless, the preliminary interviews at the ministry at the time probably meant that such wiretapping measures were only carried out sporadically at lawyers and only after judicial approval. The discussion in board meetings on the subject of permissible sideline or second occupation then took up a lot of time. The current occasion was the establishment of a funeral home by a colleague, which led to the question, which was relevant under professional law at the time, as to whether the activity as owner or manager of a funeral home was compatible with the activity of a lawyer. The discussions between the presidium representative and the colleagues concerned were unsuccessful. As far as I can remember, the question of this incompatibility was not decided in court at the time. The question of suitable legal or attorney training, which has been a constant concern of all lawyers' committees since the entry into force of the judicial laws in 1879, had become particularly topical in the chamber district in 1979 because the Free State of Bavaria at the University of Augsburg used the so-called single-stage training model in the form of a Combination of studies and practical training, including the internship was created. As far as I know, there was no final evaluation that was made available to the public. The fact that the model was not continued or was adopted for all trainee lawyers as a whole is to be seen as a clear indication that this concept, which is certainly a good idea, only brings better training results if it is implemented with an above-average amount of committed trainers becomes. There has never been an investigation as to whether this expenditure was not offset by a corresponding return. The chamber was largely skeptical of the model because of the limited focus on lawyers. 8 Jürgen F. Ernst

9 A FOURTH CENTURY OF RAK MUNICH Over time, inquiries to the Chamber on how old and sick colleagues could be helped who were no longer able to do their jobs due to age or health reasons. It should not be forgotten that a considerable number of members of the Chamber, either due to war or imprisonment, were unable to take up or exercise their profession for a long time, while others had lost their economic basis due to the effects of war or currency reform. The Chamber's Board decided to provide funds for this, albeit to a limited extent, which the Chamber received from fines. A separate department was established. When it became known, which was possible in many ways, that a colleague or their spouse (later expanded to include life partners) was in need through no fault of their own, the Chamber unconventionally granted help through one-off bridging payments after carefully examining the overall circumstances, but partly through lifelong ongoing support. Shortly before Christmas, the colleagues were asked for donations for further financing. The consistently pleasing collective result enabled the board to alleviate all urgent emergencies without claiming membership fees. In this context, the death benefit must not be forgotten, a one-off payment by the Chamber, which was and will be paid to the next of kin in the event of death, regardless of the need in each case, in order to enable, as it was originally called, a proper burial. This death benefit, often viewed with disdain by colleagues from outside Munich, has proven to be of help to relatives in a large number of cases, as it was immediately paid out to an account to be specified by the relatives, while the estate, no matter how considerable, was in many cases was not available for immediate payments, particularly funeral expenses. In the case of questions about the continuation of death grants that are repeatedly discussed, this aspect, which contributed significantly to the appreciation of the chamber as an institution in professional circles, should not be underestimated. The constant increase in legal provisions and higher court decisions, which increasingly focused on specific issues and neglected their general guiding function, led to a diversification of legal requirements and a tremendous increase in the material available to the lawyer. This becomes clear in the steadily increasing number of specialist journals. The not always understandable tightening of liability jurisprudence by the higher courts at the expense of the lawyer was added. At that time, the German Lawyers Association and only one commercial provider offered further training seminars, which, however, were difficult to attend for the majority of the colleagues because of the associated costs and the often difficult accessibility of the training location. It was therefore the Munich Bar Association that started the first extremely inexpensive advanced training seminars in 1979, initially at the weekend in the beautiful Scheyern Monastery, and later in Fischbachau in the Richterheim, and thus laid the foundation for its own training program, which against all opposition from In the meantime, numerous commercial providers and, above all, resistance from their own ranks, continues as before with success, as the large number of colleagues attending the chamber seminars shows. The weak point of this advanced training course, which is now only offered extensively in Munich with a few exceptions, is the neglect of the now numerically strengthened colleagues in the more distant district courts, who largely have to organize their training themselves without the help of the Chamber. Jürgen F. Ernst 9

10 A FOURTH CENTURY OF RAK MUNICH The year 1983 had become of considerable importance for the then younger colleagues with regard to old-age security and it has remained so to this day. After two negative decisions in the previous years, a strike vote was carried out among the colleagues in 1983, in which 75.8% of the participants opted for compulsory membership in a professional pension fund. This created the prerequisites for the Bavarian pension fund, which after just a few years proved to be a beneficial institution and today offers all newly admitted employees the possibility of a professional pension scheme that is free from government interference. Also in 1983 the lawyers began to be involved in the development of a catalog of measures to relieve the courts. The Munich Chamber played a key role in these discussions. The need for compromise solutions in large bodies, however, has meant that to date, far-reaching results, with the exception of legal remedies, have not been achieved. After the colleagues had been informed and briefed in detail in 14 major events, the Bayerische Rechtsanwaltsversorgung commenced operations in 1984. The Munich Chamber had given every colleague who, due to their advanced age, only had the option of joining this pension fund, to seek advice from a specialist colleague on the extent to which it would be worthwhile to join this pension fund by voluntarily joining and paying, in some cases, considerable amounts. This information opportunity became more active and, as I think, profitable use was made, although even then many colleagues did not have the means to make use of the certainly economically sensible payment of larger amounts into the pension fund. Here, too, the board of the chamber was able to help a large number of colleagues to justify pension claims by paying into the pension fund from the point of view of welfare on a loan basis.A gratifying result was that these colleagues paid back the loans that had made it possible for them to join the pension fund, mostly in pennies and pennies, to the Chamber, in part with letters of thanks. In 1985, two completely different aspects were at the forefront of chamber events. On the one hand, this was the opening of the Seehaus in Seeshaupt on Lake Starnberg, which took place on 20./21. June was handed over to the legal public. The Munich Bar Association inherited this lake house from colleague Gänssler, who bequeathed this property on Lake Starnberg to the Bar Association as a subsequent heir on the condition that it would benefit the legal profession. In terms of both legal and factual matters, it was not easy to take on this legacy. After much consultation, the pretty, but totally neglected property was repaired and an association was founded to continue operating the lake house. This gem is still available to all colleagues for a small fee and is often used because of the good care and the beautiful location. Another case of inheritance confronted the board with the decision to either leave two thirds of the equivalent value of a legacy to the University of Munich or to take over the building on Gundelindenstrasse in Munich itself. The board of directors has opted for the latter and has thus been given the opportunity to offer old and worthy colleagues adequate retirement accommodation. In the same year, official contacts with foreign chambers were established for the first time, with the initiative coming from these chambers. Bordeaux, twin city of the state capital Munich, had invited to visit through its Bavarian president. The return visit then led to mutual support, which was also contractually agreed, especially 10 Jürgen F. Ernst

11 A QUARTER CENTURY RAK MUNICH in the accommodation of trainee lawyers. On the other hand, as part of the expansion of its foreign relations, the Milan Chamber invited the Munich Chamber to the annual opening of the judicial year. The splendor and pomp of this event stood in stark contrast to the rest of the equipment in the Milan judiciary. This contact that was established at the time continues and gives the participants a clear picture of the difficulties other lawyers and jurisdictions have to contend with in the respective part of Europe. On in Munich City Hall: Batonnier de l Ordre Bertrand Favreau (right) and President Eckart Warmuth (left) sign the partnership agreement The year brought a new aspect of legal training. With a large majority, the Chamber Board decided to set up introductory seminars for young lawyers. The aim of this event, which is unfortunately limited in time, is to open up the view for legal work in the field of tension between client, opponent and court. These introductory events have developed into an institution that is still being continued, albeit in a different form, and that is enjoyed by young colleagues. These introductory seminars were then supplemented in 1987 by the so-called welcome events for young lawyers. These events aim to bring the Chamber as its organization closer to all newly admitted colleagues and to convey the knowledge that the Chamber acts in the interests of the profession and that the supervisory functions are not for their own sake, but with a view to that Exercise the welfare of the entire legal profession. The 70th birthday of Honorary President Warmuth in November 1987 gave the opportunity to bring together all the leaders of the Bavarian judiciary once again in November for an event in the Bavarian Residence. The Chamber has always endeavored to maintain personal contacts with all representatives of the Bavarian judiciary, from the presidents and directors of the courts to the public prosecutors to the ministries. Many individual problems, especially between individual colleagues on the one hand and the public prosecutor's office and the courts or administrative authorities on the other, could therefore be resolved in an informal way that was mostly mutually satisfactory different from the ideas of its members. For this purpose, a survey of the members was carried out on the questions of professional ethics that were central at the time. To the great astonishment, not only of the Munich Chamber Board, 90% of the respondents wanted professional regulation of advertising behavior and collegiality. To the astonishment of many, there was no difference in voting behavior between the two cities of Munich and Augsburg and the district courts of Deggendorf to Kempten. With the practical study period at the lawyer introduced in the same year, the vocational orientation was already introduced in university training from a different starting point. Much emphasis was placed on the out-of-court settlement of disputes. The Conflict Management seminar brought new aspects into legal professional life not only in terms of words, but also in terms of content. The Jürgen F. Ernst 11

12 A FOURTH CENTURY OF RAK MUNICH Establishment of the new district court in Ingolstadt and the establishment of the first arbitration board at the district court of Munich led to some unrest among the colleagues, which could be resolved at short notice in coordination with the respective court president. In 1989, the expansion of the chamber became inevitable. Despite the limited supply at the time, it was possible to rent a building, Landwehrstrasse 61, thus creating space for adequate accommodation not only for the office but also for the establishment of a separate training hall. This was inaugurated with the lawyer training event cycle. The landlady, well-disposed towards the legal profession, ensured a peaceful atmosphere in the courtyard with a happily babbling pigeon fountain. The Chamber Assembly in 1989 instructed the Chamber Board to urge the Federal Chamber of Lawyers for democratization, regardless of the number of members of the respective chamber; each chamber had only one vote (and still has it today). Formally, this could lead to a disadvantage for the large, in particular the largest chamber, the Munich Chamber. I believe that this did not result in a disadvantage, as we have certainly succeeded in asserting the interests of our chamber in the Federal Chamber of Lawyers even without weighting the votes. The reunification and the questions that arose from it largely made use of the board's activities in 1990/91. Lawyers in the chamber district, who only worked temporarily without permanent establishment in the new federal states, or with the help of lawyers in our district in accelerating the settlement of open property issues, were in addition to local questions, such as the reclassification of the Erding and Freising local courts from the Munich II district court and the assignment to the Landshut Regional Court with its effects and the information and advice that has become necessary for colleagues, in the foreground. Considerations of counteracting the noticeable decline in apprenticeships by making the profession of paralegal more attractive even during the apprenticeship, led to the training of office managers, which has been successfully carried out in separate courses since then. On our Landshut colleague Ms. Ute Ertel was murdered in the courtroom. By participating in the funeral ceremonies, the board of directors not only clearly expressed its solidarity with Mr Ertel, but also clearly expressed its concern over death as a result of entering the profession. As is so often the case, the Munich Chamber was ahead of its time when it held a ceremony with Austrian, Italian and French colleagues in Munich that year. The occasion was the aforementioned paper by Rudolf Gneist on the Free Advocacy in Prussia from The adoption of a Reich Lawyers' Act, which for the first time brought the freedom of the lawyer to the whole of Germany, but only followed in 1878 (came into force on). The Federal Government had come closer to the endeavors to democratize the legal profession by introducing the constitutional assembly into legal professional law. The first meeting took place in 1994. The assembly tackled the task of putting professional lawyers' rights on a platform supported by the majority with great enthusiasm. The following bylaws showed what difficulties this entailed. Many colleagues will still remember that the magazine Focus caused considerable unrest with its serial about the 500 best lawyers in Germany. In the interests of the colleagues, the Munich Chamber has opposed this 12 Jürgen F. Ernst

13 A FOURTH CENTURY OF RAK MUNICH public ranking defended on an inadequate basis and thus achieved that the limits of such representations have been set by the BGH in such a way that these undertakings are no longer repeated. In April 1995 we had to bury our honorary president Eckhart Warmuth. The first meeting of the articles of association in Berlin dealt largely with the lawyer in the second profession. The legal-political discussion on conflict settlement without a court was continued by the lecture Arbitration instead of Judging by the then Minister of Justice and colleague Leeb in the Chamber Assembly. Professional liability insurance for lawyers became compulsory. The sharp upward trend became clear when the Chamber welcomed its first member in 1997. At the same time, the total assets of Bayerische Rechtsanwaltsversorgung reached DM 1 billion. The unrest among colleagues about the abolition of court holidays, which came into force this year, has subsided surprisingly quickly. The chamber honored the change in the office of President of the Bavarian Lawyers' Disciplinary Court from Schroeder to Sernetz in the appropriate form. Due to the changed professional law in law firm brochures and on letterheads, the focus of interests and activities kept the board far more occupied than the chamber's accession to the UIA (Union Internationale des Avocats), which formed a new starting point for maintaining contacts with chambers outside of Germany. The effects of the law firm and partnership company, the employment of colleagues in permanent employment relationships to the fiduciary takeover of GmbH shares for non-lawyers occupied the board in the same year, exactly 60 years after the Reichsprogromnacht of, thanks to the persistent preparatory work of our former managing director and later board member Dr. Gralla to put up a memorial plaque in the Palace of Justice with the names of all Jewish colleagues persecuted in the chamber district, which was unveiled on the occasion of the opening of the exhibition Lawyer Without Justice (printed on p. 14). In continuation of the efforts to settle disputes out of court, the Chamber participated in the model project reparation in criminal proceedings via legal arbitration boards. In addition to the first law firm in the chamber district, the focus of the board's activities was on the problems of the pseudo-self-employment of colleagues, a problem area that is still topical and, especially in 2004, the subject of numerous discussions under the aspect of the conflict of interests. At the funeral of the Nestor of the Bavarian Bar, Attorney Dr. Fritz Ostler, a large number of the board members took part. It was also in 1999 when the board of directors had to deal with the issue of money laundering and attorney's fees due to the first, incomprehensible court decisions. The changes coming from 2000, namely the release of the ability to postulate before the regional courts and the restrictions on legal remedies through the ZPO reform, were the reason for the three Bavarian chambers to appear publicly in a full-page advertisement in the major daily newspapers. This may have helped, in cooperation with the judges, that the most serious encroachments on procedural law could ultimately be averted. The incalculable consequences of the money laundering directive and the establishment directive, which came into force on, have preoccupied the management board several times due to their not harmless effects and the unrest that has arisen among colleagues. Jürgen F. Ernst 13

14 A QUARTER CENTURY RAK MUNICH Memorial plaque with the names of all Jewish colleagues persecuted in the chamber district in the Munich Palace of Justice 14 Jürgen F. Ernst

15 A FOURTH CENTURY OF RAK MUNICH The year was eventful for the Executive Board. It was initially overshadowed by the death of our Augsburg Vice President Dr. Waibel and the death of his colleague Klaka, who has been a member of the Chamber Board for decades and is known far beyond the boundaries of our chamber district. With the establishment of the Association for the Promotion of the Institute for Legal Law at the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich, the foundation stone was laid for the start of legal training at the university. The modernization of the Bavarian judiciary continued with the introduction of the automatic dunning procedure at the central entrance court in Coburg. The meeting of the working group of the presidents of the law courts as well as the general meeting of the Federal Bar Association on in Munich gave the opportunity, combined with the presentation of the charter of the client's rights, to present the legal profession as a whole to the public in a positive way. After extensive renovation and renovation work, the new Kammer im Tal 33 building was opened in autumn 2002. This enabled the annual meeting of the neighboring and friendly chambers, an institution that serves the professional exchange of ideas between the southern German, Austrian and northern Italian chambers and develops common interests with regard to a European legal profession, to be held in the new house. At an information day in the new Tal 33 building, the statue designed by Professor Fischer was presented in the entrance area of ​​the colleagues. After the German Money Laundering Act came into force with some improvements with regard to the legal profession, the board of directors had to deal with the draft laws on an extension of legally permissible wiretapping measures (large eavesdropping), in which the legal profession should also be involved. At the same time, there was a threat of the introduction of trade tax for freelancers. At least until further notice, the liberal professions remained exempt from trade tax. The disputes as to whether eavesdropping measures, which also include conversations between the client and the lawyer, and their exploitation are permissible, have not yet been concluded. On the occasion of the promulgation of the Reich Lawyers' Act in June 1878, i.e. 125 years ago in 2003, the Chamber held a ceremony in Augsburg to which the presidents of the courts from the chamber district were also invited and to which the President of the Federal Court of Justice, Prof. Dr. . Günter Hirsch gave the keynote lecture (printed in: RAK-Mitteilungen III / 2003, p. 3 ff.). The year 2004 was dominated by the reform of the Legal Advice Act, which calls into question the position of lawyers as the advisable adviser in all legal matters. How far the ideas of the federal government will be implemented here at the expense of the legal profession and the public seeking law cannot yet be determined. What is certain, however, is that the new lawyers' remuneration law that came into force, which replaced BRAGO, only brings about a slight improvement in the economic situation for the legal profession and does not allow equality with other professional groups. Legal training began at the University of Munich. In addition, the anniversary year 2004 is dominated by the new information technology. After the first test runs with the automated dunning procedure, the electronic commercial register and the electronic land register were successful, the Federal Bar Association and the German Bar Association created the basis for an appropriate participation of the legal profession in the development of the necessary legal regulations in this area by setting up a joint commission. Their sensible application taking into account and advice Jürgen F. Ernst 15

16 A FOURTH CENTURY OF RAK MUNICH upholding data protection and professional secrecy is an imminent task for the entire German legal profession, and the Munich Chamber will make its contribution to resolving this. The cooperation with DATEV and the admission as a certification service provider are a first step in what we all wish and hope for, a promising future for the benefit of citizens seeking justice, colleagues and thus also for the benefit of the entire legal profession.The client has charter of the rights of the client 1. the right to legal assistance from a freely chosen lawyer of his confidence at any time, even if he does not have sufficient resources, 2. the right to one personally and economically, also from state authority independent lawyer, 3. the right to a lawyer who is free from instructions and the influence of third parties, 4. the right to a lawyer who is also bound to absolute secrecy towards courts and authorities, whose confidentiality is guaranteed in personal, telephone and written correspondence, 5 . the right to a lawyer who carefully and exclusively represents the interests of the client and no conflicting interests, 6 the right to full consideration of the submissions of his lawyer, 7 the right to a qualified and professionally examined lawyer who is liable for defective service , 8. the right to a verifiable billing of the legal services istung. 16 Jürgen F. Ernst

17 DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHAMBER Development of the Chamber Hansjörg Staehle Lawyer President of the RAK Munich 1. The members The number of members On the bar association for the higher regional court district of Munich had members. At that time it was already the chamber with the largest number of members, followed at some distance by the Hamm Lawyers' Association and Frankfurt am Main with members. The traditional top position in terms of membership is partly due to the geographic size of the chamber district, but above all to the attractiveness of Munich as a location. Munich has always housed an unusually large number of courts of all jurisdictions and instances. On the Munich Bar Association had members (on the number of members was), followed by the Frankfurt am Main Chamber with members, Hamm with and Cologne with members. The smallest bar associations in Germany are Zweibrücken with and Saarbrücken with members (BRAK-Mitt. 2003, p. 124). In the 1980s, the number of members of the Munich Chamber increased from on to members on. This corresponds to an increase of approx. 53% in a decade. From 1990 to the end of 1999 the number of members had risen by about a further 69%. In the four years of, there was a further increase of almost 27% in members. With these high numbers, some may be astonished that the increase in membership in Munich is even slightly lower than the national average. The number of admitted lawyers was nationwide compared to today's lawyers (status). Nationwide, there has been an increase in the number of lawyers of around 250% since 1980, and in Munich it has increased by almost 230%. The number of members in Munich is currently rising below the national average. The increase has apparently flattened somewhat since the peak in 2001: while the number of members increased by 963 in 2001, the net increase in 2002 decreased to 822 and last year to 632 new members. It remains to be seen whether this tendency will stabilize into a trend, which could lead to a stable number of members as early as 2007. Age and gender Little changes can be seen in the age-related stratification, as the following overview shows: As of today: Members younger than 40 years, 7% members years, 0% members years, 9% members years, 0% members 70 years and older 555 3 .5% For comparison: The percentages for members up to 40 years of age on: 46%; am: 39.3%; at the %. The proportion of female members is increasing continuously. The percentage of admitted female lawyers in 1980 was approx. 8.9%, Hansjörg Staehle 17

18 CHAMBER DEVELOPMENT in 1990 already 15.7% and today approx. 30.6%. Since around 40% of the new admissions are female members, with an upward trend, the total proportion of female lawyers increases by around one percentage point each year. Specialist lawyers The development of specialist lawyers in the chamber district is shown in the article by Clausen (p. 76 ff.). Today, the proportion of specialist lawyers in the chamber district is around 11.32% of the members and thus in the range of the national average. Distribution according to LG districts The distribution of the members to the 10 district court districts results from the following overview: District court district Permitted percent members Munich I, 03% Munich II, 51% Augsburg, 76% Traunstein 701 4.44% Landshut 568 3.60% Ingolstadt 416 2.64% Kempten 383 2.43% Memmingen 320 2.03% Passau 280 1.77% Deggendorf 139 0.88% A special case is undoubtedly the LG district Munich I with no fewer than members. It is explained by the attractiveness of Munich with its large law faculty at the Ludwig Maximilians University. Munich has always been home to a large number of dishes. It is a mandatory location for large law firms. As an insurance metropolis, a major banking location, center of the media industry and IT companies, Munich is suitable for both freelance lawyers and, in particular, for second-time professionals who are employed full-time or part-time. Despite the high density of lawyers in Munich, the Bavarian capital is only in third place after Hamburg and Düsseldorf, albeit with a minimal gap. 2. In his monograph 100 Years of the Munich Bar Association on p. 238/239, the board of directors Heinrich lists the 32 current board members in 1979. On the occasion of the ordinary elections to the Chamber Board in 1980, colleagues Otto Paepcke, Dr. Anton Sienz and Dr. Hans Schmidt-Siebeth from the Chamber Board. The lawyers Dr. Christoph von Heimendahl, Dr. Fritz-Eckehard Kempter and Hansjörg Staehle newly elected. In 1980 the following members belonged to the executive board (if no office location is specified, the executive board members were admitted to the LG Munich I): Dr. Karl Erich Bachmayr Hans Gerhard Beck Dr. Hans Ludwig Donle Christina Edmond von Kirschbaum Dr. Paul Ermer / Günzburg Dr. Jürgen F. Ernst Bernhard Floegel / Landshut Walter Forstner / Deggendorf Hans Gaßner Dr. Robert Geigel Dr. Georg Gruno / Augsburg Dr. Christoph von Heimendahl Dr. Gerhard Hettinger / Augsburg Ottheinz Kääb Werner Kästle Dr. Fritz-Eckehard Kempter Hans Aegidius Kirchner Rainer Klaka Dr. Harald Kleine Marion Liebl-Blittersdorff Dr. Erwin Lohner Günter Maull Otto Wolfgang Müller Dr. Götz Pollzien Dr. Walter Pothmann / Kempten Helmut Raab / Traunstein Dr. Andreas Reiners Dr. Hans Reiter / Rosenheim Hansjörg Staehle Eckart Warmuth 18 Hansjörg Staehle

19 DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHAMBER Gottfried Wörner / Augsburg Peter Wrba / Tegernsee On the occasion of the ordinary chamber board elections in 1982, the following colleagues left: Dr. Karl Erich Bachmayr, Dr. Robert Geigel, Dr. Walter Pothmann and Dr. Hans Reiter. The following were newly elected: Dr. Uwe Clausen, Dr. Rupert Haslinger, Dr. Albert Hägele / Kempten, Freimut Höchstädter / Ingolstadt. In 1983 there was a replacement election for Walter Forstner / Deggendorf, who had left the company prematurely for health reasons. Dr. Christian Langnickel / Deggendorf, colleague Günter Maull left. Dr. Werner Scheuer / Rosenheim the following colleagues left: Dr. Robert Haslinger, Hans Aegidius Kirchner, Marion Liebl-Blittersdorff and Otto Wolfgang Müller. Dr. Franz Bockhorni / Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Stefan Friederich, Dr. Doris Kloster-Harz and Jürgen Völtz left: Dr. Paul Ermer, Stephan Friederich, Dr. Harald Kleine, Dr. Christian Langnickel and Helmut Raab. Ernst Burgmair / Dachau, Theodor Götze / Viechtach, Armin Griessbach / Traunstein and Helga Anna Teich were newly elected. From 1990 the number of board members increased from 32 to 34 due to a resolution of the chamber assembly (63 para. 2 sentence 2 BRAO). Georg Gruno, Dr. Doris Kloster-Harz, Helga Anna Teich, Jürgen Völtz and the long-time President Eckart Warmuth, who was appointed Honorary President of our Chamber. Dieter Fasel / Memmingen, Peter Klima and Uwe Frhr were newly elected. von Saalfeld, Dr. Eberhard Waibel / Augsburg, Sabine Wernet and Klaus Zehner / Passau left: Stephan Friederich, Armin Griessbach and Dr. Götz Pollzien. Jürgen Bestelmeyer, Wolfgang Prestele and Cornelia Rohleder / Traunstein were newly elected: Hans Gerhard Beck, Ernst Burgmair, Wolfgang Prestele and Dr. Andreas Reiners. The Chamber's long-standing Managing Director after his retirement, Dr. Giselher Gralla, as well as Heinz Merk / Peißenberg and Dr. Eckhart Müller retired: Armin Griessbach / Traunstein, Rainer Klaka, Dr. Werner Scheuer and Helga Anna Teich as well as Gottfried Wörner. Rolf-Werner Bock, Petra Heinicke, Dr. Christof Krüger, Dr. Thomas Weckbach / Ausburg and Dr. Heinrich Thomas Wrede / Prien am Chiemsee retired: Hans Gaßner and Sabine Wernet. Jürgen Völtz, who returned to the board, and Dr. Michael von Waldthausen. Retired in 2000: Rolf-Werner Bock, Theodor Götze, Dr. Christoph von Heimendahl, Werner Kästle, Dr. Erwin Lohner, Uwe Freiherr von Saalfeld, Dr. Michael von Waldhausen and Peter Wrba. Andreas Dietzel / Gauting, Markus Eigner, Sabine Feller, Dr. Heinz Giebelmann, Andreas von Mariassy, ​​Max Pausenberger / Deggendorf, Helga Anna Teich, who returned to the board, as well as Michael Then and Jochen Uher. On was Vice President Dr. Eberhard Waibel passed away. On the occasion of the board elections in 2002, the following resigned: Dr. Franz Bockhorni, Markus Eigner, Dr. Jürgen F. Ernst, the long-time President and today's Honorary President, Bernhard Floegel and Peter Klima. Martin Bläser / Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Angelica von der Betten, Gerhard Decker / Augsburg, Christian Klima, the son of the retired Vice President Peter Klima, Gabriele Loewenfeld and Harald Seiler / Landshut were newly elected. Hansjörg Staehle 19th

20 DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHAMBER In 2004 our colleagues Max Pausenberger / Deggendorf and the Vice President of our Chamber, Dr. Gerhard Hettinger / Augsburg, from the board of directors. The colleagues Dr. Michael Schröter / Viechtach and Werner Weiss / Augsburg. The board of directors for the 2004/2006 electoral period is composed as follows (office locations are again only mentioned for external colleagues): Jürgen Bestelmeyer Martin Bläser / Garmisch-Partenkirchen Dr. Uwe Clausen Angelica from the ceiling Gerhard Decker / Augsburg Andreas Dietzel / Gauting Dr. Hans Ludwig Donle Christina Edmond von Kirschbaum Dieter Fasel / Memmingen Sabine Feller Dr. Heinz Giebelmann Dr. Albert Hägele / Kempten Petra Heinicke Freimut Höchstädter / Ingolstadt Ottheinz Kääb Dr. Fritz-Eckehard Kempter Christian Klima Dr. Christof Krüger Gabriele Loewenfeld Andreas von Mariassy Heinz Merk / Peißenberg Dr. Eckhart Müller Cornelia Rohleder / Traunstein Dr. Michael Schröter / Viechtach Harald Seiler / Landshut Hansjörg Staehle Helga Anna Teich Michael Then Jochen Uher Jürgen Völtz Dr. Thomas Weckbach / Augsburg Werner Weiss / Augsburg Dr. Heinrich Thomas Wrede / Prien am Chiemsee Klaus Zehner / Passau The voluntary work on the Chamber Board is laborious and time-consuming. However, like any activity that extends beyond one's own interests, it is also satisfactory. This satisfaction is expressed in the often long-term commitment of the board members. Of the incumbent board members 25 years ago, i.e. in 1979, three are still on the board today: Dr. Hans-Ludwig Donle, Christina Edmond von Kirschbaum and the indestructible Ottheinz Kääb, senior chairman of the board of directors. In accordance with a long-term exercise (cf. Heinrich, p. 242), the board of directors draws on colleagues who are interested in and committed to the work of the board in accordance with 76 para. 1 sentence 2 BRAO. As reporters for the individual board departments, you do a full job as speakers. These are currently the following colleagues in alphabetical order: Celia Elsdörfer, Irmgard Etlinger, Peter Klima, Dr. Dr. Hans-Jürgen Kramer, Wolfgang Prestele, Gudrun Rößler and Joachim Schwarzenau. A special bond with the work of the Chamber is expressed in the fact that, along with colleagues Wolfgang Prestele and former Vice President Peter Klima, board members continue to make themselves available as employees after their departure. The board departments As early as 1968 (cf. Heinrich, p. 241 f.), The board of directors switched to performing its tasks not as a rule by the large committee of the entire board, but by departments formed for this purpose with a manageable number of members (77 BRAO). The daily work of the Chamber Board would simply not be manageable without such a division. The Chamber's Board has set up ten departments, which are headed by particularly experienced colleagues. Department I (chair: Andreas von Mariassy), II (chair: Heinz Merk / Peißenberg) and X (chair: Jochen Uher) deal with professional supervision, i.e. they are responsible for assessing complaints under professional law. Your responsibility is alphabetical for the LG district Munich I, otherwise 20 Hansjörg Staehle

21 DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHAMBER locally divided into district courts. Three management board departments, namely department III (chair: Christina Edmond von Kirschbaum), II (chair: Jürgen Völtz) and V (chair: Jürgen Bestelmeyer) are responsible for the reimbursement of expert opinions on fees. As is well known, these are to be obtained from the courts if the appropriateness of framework fees is disputed in fee disputes between lawyer and client (12 para. 2 BRAGO or 14 para. 2 RVG). In addition, in accordance with 73 para. 2 no. 8 BRAO, the three fee departments will also provide expert opinions from the chamber board on other disputes relating to fees. Meeting of Department VI Specialist Lawyers, RBerG on (in the picture from left to right: Lawyer Freimut Höchstädter, Lawyer Andreas von Mariassy, ​​Lawyer Dr. Uwe Clausen, Lawyer Angelica v. Derdecke) For the approval of specialist lawyers and the prosecution of violations of the RBerG is Department VI of the Chamber Board (chair: Dr. Hans Ludwig Donle) is responsible. Department VII, under the longstanding, meritorious direction of colleague Ottheinz Kääb (see also his contribution to training, p. 72 ff.), Deals with the important areas of training and further education for chamber members, trainee lawyers and students. Department VIII (Chair: Dieter Fasel / Memmingen) deals with the Chamber's public relations work and Department IX (Chair: Dr. Christof Krüger) deals with the areas of international relations, EU law and the admission of foreign colleagues according to 11 ff. EuRAG). The board of directors has appointed the colleagues Petra Heinicke and Helga Anna Teich as well as Freimut Höchstädter / Ingolstadt as agents according to the BBiG for the area of ​​the training of legal clerks. The Presidium The Presidium naturally plays an important role in fulfilling the tasks of the Chamber. As the managing body, it has to deal with the business of the board and manage the chamber's assets (79 BRAO). Everyone can imagine that running a self-governing body of almost members is associated with a high expenditure of time and effort. The members of the presidium are elected by the board from among its members. The law (78 BRAO) provides for at least four members of the Presidium, President, Vice-President, Secretary, and Treasurer. However, the Munich Bar Association had already made use of the opportunity 25 years ago to increase the number of Presidium members (78 para. 3 BRAO). The Presidium consisted of the following five lawyers: President: Eckart Warmuth Vice President: Dr. Robert Geigel Vice President: Dr. Georg Gruno / Augsburg Secretary: Ottheinz Kääb Treasurer: Marion Liebl-Blittersdorff The election of the Presidium takes place according to the schedule after every ordinary board election, i.e. every two years (78 para. 4 BRAO). On the occasion of the presidential election in 1982, Dr. Robert Geigel out. The number of presidium members was temporarily increased to six. The colleagues Dr. Jürgen F. Ernst and Hans Georg Beck, the treasurer Marion Liebl-Blittersdorff and the secretary Ottheinz Kääb left the presidency

22 DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHAMBER dium. The newly elected treasurer Dr. Andreas Reiners. The Presidium now had five members again, who were confirmed in their offices in 1988. Jürgen F. Ernst elected President to succeed Eckart Warmuth. Eckart Warmuth and Dr. Georg Gruno / Augsburg retired. Gottfried Wörner / Augsburg and Dr. Fritz-Eckehard Kempter. In this occupation, the Presidium was re-elected in 1992, and the number of Presidium members was increased again to six. Furthermore, the board decided to give all members of the presidium the designation of vice-president in future, a relief for the perception of the constantly growing representation tasks in a large chamber district. All presidium members are elected by the executive committee in a secret ballot, each presidium member in a separate ballot.According to the decision of the board of directors, the five vice-presidents represent the president in the order of their election to the presidium, whereby the fourth elected also acts as secretary and the fifth elected also acts as treasurer. Newly elected in 1994 were Hansjörg Staehle, Dr. Albert Hägele / Kempten and Peter Klima left Gottfried Wörner / Augsburg. In his place, following an unwritten rule, a colleague from Augsburg, where it had its own bar association until 1945, was elected, namely colleague Dr. Eberhard Waibel. In the composition elected in 1996, the presidium held office for three electoral terms until the 2002 presidium election, attorney Hansjörg Staehle succeeded Dr. Jürgen F. Ernst elected. For Vice President Dr. Eberhard Waibel became Dr. Gerhard Hettinger / Ausburg elected to the Presidium. After thirty years of meritorious work on the Chamber Board, he did not stand for election in 2004 and thus also resigned from the Presidium. Following the exercise already mentioned, another colleague from Augsburg, Dr. Thomas Weckbach, elected as his successor to the Presidium, which at the time of publication of this Festschrift was composed as follows: President: Hansjörg Staehle Vice-President: Dr. Eckhart Müller Vice President: Dr. Thomas Weckbach / Augsburg Vice President: Dr. Albert Hägele / Kempten Vice President: Cornelia Rohleder / Traunstein also Secretary Vice President: Dr. Fritz-Eckehard Kempter at the same time treasurer Working method of the board of directors and presidium The entire board of directors with its 34 members usually meets ten times a year. On his agenda are the information and the discussion of current legislative proposals and decisions as well as the handling of individual problems which, because of their special importance, are presented to the entire board by the individual board departments. According to the rules of procedure, the entire board is also responsible for deciding on appeals against complaints that have been imposed by the professional law departments against members of the Chamber. The board of directors has to protect and promote the interests of the bar association (73 para. 1 sentence 2 BRAO). The general decision-making process of the bar association takes place in the entire board. The individual board departments also hold working meetings ten times a year. However, the workload often forces additional sessions. The Presidium practically performs the function of an additional board department in which, on the one hand, the meetings of the full board are prepared and, on the other hand, matters are dealt with and decided under delegated responsibility for the full board. Of particular importance 22 Hansjörg Staehle

23 DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHAMBER are negative decisions on applications for admission (in accordance with 80 para. 4 BRAO, positive decisions are transferred to the President alone by resolution of the Board of Directors) and the revocation of admission to the bar. The Presidium meets every two weeks. Little has changed in the way the Executive Board and Presidium as such work in the past 25 years (see Heinrich, p. 241 f.). However, due to multiple changes in the legal basis, expanded responsibilities (e.g. admissions, specialist lawyers), weight shifts in professional law (e.g. the elimination of the advertising ban) and modern communication options have changed the content and accelerated processes. Over the past 25 years, chamber work has had to adapt to modern business life in a similarly fundamental way as has been the case for the work of every single colleague. Board meeting room Hansjörg Staehle 23

24