• Mehr als 3 Millionen Wörter Inhalt
  • |
  • info@itmedialaw.com
  • |
  • Tel: 03322 5078053
ITMediaLaw - Rechtsanwalt Marian Härtel
Warenkorb
Plugin Install : Cart Icon need WooCommerce plugin to be installed.
  • en English
  • de Deutsch
  • Informationen
    • Ideal partner
    • About lawyer Marian Härtel
    • Quick and flexible access
    • Principles as a lawyer
    • Why a lawyer and business consultant?
    • Focus areas of attorney Marian Härtel
      • Focus on start-ups
      • Investment advice
      • Corporate law
      • Cryptocurrencies, Blockchain and Games
      • AI and SaaS
      • Streamers and influencers
      • Games and esports law
      • IT/IP Law
      • Law firm for GMBH,UG, GbR
      • Law firm for IT/IP and media law
    • The everyday life of an IT lawyer
    • How can I help clients?
    • Testimonials
    • Team: Saskia Härtel – WHO AM I?
    • Agile and lean law firm
    • Price overview
    • Various information
      • Terms
      • Privacy policy
      • Imprint
  • Services
    • Support and advice of agencies
    • Contract review and preparation
    • Games law consulting
    • Consulting for influencers and streamers
    • Advice in e-commerce
    • DLT and Blockchain consulting
    • Legal advice in corporate law: from incorporation to structuring
    • Legal compliance and expert opinions
    • Outsourcing – for companies or law firms
    • Booking as speaker
  • News
    • Gloss / Opinion
    • Law on the Internet
    • Online retail
    • Law and computer games
    • Law and Esport
    • Blockchain and web law
    • Data protection Law
    • Copyright
    • Labour law
    • Competition law
    • Corporate
    • EU law
    • Law on the protection of minors
    • Tax
    • Other
    • Internally
  • Podcast
    • ITMediaLaw Podcast
  • Knowledge base
    • Laws
    • Legal terms
    • Contract types
    • Clause types
    • Forms of financing
    • Legal means
    • Authorities
    • Company forms
    • Tax
    • Concepts
  • Videos
    • Information videos – about Marian Härtel
    • Videos – about me (Couch)
    • Blogpost – individual videos
    • Videos on services
    • Shorts
    • Podcast format
    • Third-party videos
    • Other videos
  • Contact
Kurzberatung
  • Informationen
    • Ideal partner
    • About lawyer Marian Härtel
    • Quick and flexible access
    • Principles as a lawyer
    • Why a lawyer and business consultant?
    • Focus areas of attorney Marian Härtel
      • Focus on start-ups
      • Investment advice
      • Corporate law
      • Cryptocurrencies, Blockchain and Games
      • AI and SaaS
      • Streamers and influencers
      • Games and esports law
      • IT/IP Law
      • Law firm for GMBH,UG, GbR
      • Law firm for IT/IP and media law
    • The everyday life of an IT lawyer
    • How can I help clients?
    • Testimonials
    • Team: Saskia Härtel – WHO AM I?
    • Agile and lean law firm
    • Price overview
    • Various information
      • Terms
      • Privacy policy
      • Imprint
  • Services
    • Support and advice of agencies
    • Contract review and preparation
    • Games law consulting
    • Consulting for influencers and streamers
    • Advice in e-commerce
    • DLT and Blockchain consulting
    • Legal advice in corporate law: from incorporation to structuring
    • Legal compliance and expert opinions
    • Outsourcing – for companies or law firms
    • Booking as speaker
  • News
    • Gloss / Opinion
    • Law on the Internet
    • Online retail
    • Law and computer games
    • Law and Esport
    • Blockchain and web law
    • Data protection Law
    • Copyright
    • Labour law
    • Competition law
    • Corporate
    • EU law
    • Law on the protection of minors
    • Tax
    • Other
    • Internally
  • Podcast
    • ITMediaLaw Podcast
  • Knowledge base
    • Laws
    • Legal terms
    • Contract types
    • Clause types
    • Forms of financing
    • Legal means
    • Authorities
    • Company forms
    • Tax
    • Concepts
  • Videos
    • Information videos – about Marian Härtel
    • Videos – about me (Couch)
    • Blogpost – individual videos
    • Videos on services
    • Shorts
    • Podcast format
    • Third-party videos
    • Other videos
  • Contact
ITMediaLaw - Rechtsanwalt Marian Härtel
Home Law on the Internet

OLG Hamm and e-mail

27. June 2024
in Law on the Internet
Reading Time: 4 mins read
0 0
A A
0
img cEc7fUTQ9r6uLIReo4r7tBlC
Key Facts
  • The OLG Hamm emphasizes the challenge of e-mail access according to a recent decision from 10.08.2023.
  • The sender bears the burden of proof for the receipt of an e-mail, especially if the recipient disputes this.
  • The mere dispatch and the absence of an error message are not sufficient proof of receipt.
  • Precautionary measures are necessary, such as requesting confirmation of receipt or read receipts.
  • The court recommends considering alternative methods of service for important notices.
  • Similar rulings underline the legal risks and the need for careful documentation.
  • Regularly checking the technology can help to minimize delivery problems.

OLG Hamm: Proof of e-mail access remains a challenge

Content Hide
1. OLG Hamm: Proof of e-mail access remains a challenge
2. Arguments of the Regional Court of Hagen
3. Similar rulings and practical consequences

In a recent ruling (case no. 26 W 13/23 dated 10.08.2023), the Hamm Higher Regional Court (OLG) confirmed the requirements for proof of receipt of an email. The case underlines the legal challenges of electronic communication, especially when it comes to proving access to important documents. The decision is one of a series of similar rulings dealing with the issue of e-mail access. For companies and private individuals, this has important consequences for business transactions. The decision of the Higher Regional Court of Hamm shows that despite the widespread use of e-mails, the legal uncertainty regarding proof of access persists. It is clear that special precautions should be taken with important messages. The decision underlines the need to be aware of the legal risks involved in electronic communication.

This case concerned a decision on costs in the context of civil proceedings. The plaintiff had claimed that he had sent the defendants the documents required to verify the claim by e-mail before filing the lawsuit. However, the defendants denied receiving this e-mail. The Higher Regional Court of Hamm confirmed the decision of the lower court, the Regional Court of Hagen (case no. 10 O 328/22), according to which the plaintiff had not provided sufficient proof of receipt of the email. The court clarified that the burden of proof for the receipt of an email lies with the sender, especially if the recipient denies receipt. It emphasized that the mere sending of an e-mail and the absence of an error message do not constitute sufficient proof of actual receipt by the recipient. The Higher Regional Court of Hamm thus followed the reasoning of the Regional Court of Hagen, which had already set out the principles for proving e-mail access in the previous instance. The decision underlines the importance of careful documentation and preservation of evidence for important electronic communications.

Arguments of the Regional Court of Hagen

The Hagen Regional Court cited several important arguments in its decision of March 31, 2023. The court emphasized that prima facie evidence does not apply to the receipt of an e-mail and that the technical possibility of receipt alone is not sufficient to prove actual receipt. It pointed out that the sender bears the full burden of presentation and proof of receipt and that the absence of an error message is not sufficient proof of receipt. The Regional Court emphasized the need for additional measures to ensure access to important messages and pointed out the possibility of requesting acknowledgements of receipt or read receipts. It stated that alternative delivery methods should be considered for particularly important messages and emphasized the importance of careful documentation of the dispatch. The court recommended asking promptly if there is any doubt about the receipt of an e-mail.

Similar rulings and practical consequences

The Hamm Higher Regional Court’s decision is one of a series of similar rulings. The Regional Labor Court (LAG) of Cologne ruled on 11.01.2022 (case no. 4 Sa 315/21) that the sender of an email bears the full burden of presentation and proof of receipt. The Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main ruled on March 16, 2021 (case no. 13 U 13/20) that the receipt of an email cannot be proven solely by the sending and absence of an error message. The Federal Labor Court (BAG) clarified in a ruling from 12.08.2021 (Ref. 2 AZR 543/20) that the recipient is generally responsible for proving receipt of an email if they claim to have received it. The Higher Regional Court of Dresden ruled on March 9, 2022 (case no. 4 U 2108/21) that additional measures are required to ensure access in the case of important notifications. The Nuremberg Higher Labor Court ruled on November 2, 2020 (case no. 7 Sa 404/19) that a confirmation of receipt can prove the receipt of an email.

The decision of the Higher Regional Court of Hamm and similar rulings illustrate the risks involved in transmitting important documents by e-mail. The following recommendations apply in practice: An acknowledgement of receipt or read receipt should be requested for important messages. Alternatively, declarations of intent can be written directly in the e-mail text instead of sending them as attachments. In particularly critical cases, traditional delivery methods such as registered mail should be used. It is advisable to keep careful documentation of the dispatch and any feedback. If there are any doubts about access, enquiries should be made promptly. The use of qualified electronic signatures can increase the probative value. It is advisable to draw up internal guidelines for dealing with important electronic communication. Training for employees on the subject of e-mail communication and legal risks can be helpful. The use of delivery services or special platforms for the secure exchange of documents should be considered. Finally, it is important to regularly check and update the technical infrastructure in order to minimize delivery problems.

The ruling by the Higher Regional Court of Hamm underlines the continuing legal uncertainty surrounding e-mail traffic. It shows that despite the widespread use of e-mails in business transactions, proving the receipt of an electronic message is still a challenge. Companies and private individuals should be aware of this problem and take appropriate precautions when making important communications. The decision highlights the need to carefully consider the legal and technical aspects of electronic communication. It is clear that it may be necessary to adapt case law to technological developments. Until then, it remains essential for senders of important e-mails to take additional steps to secure and document access. The Hamm Higher Regional Court’s decision can be seen as an opportunity to review existing communication processes and adapt them if necessary. Finally, the case underlines the importance of a holistic view of communication strategies in the digital age.

 

Tags: Burden of proofCase lawCustomizationDresdenE‑mailEmployeesFederal Labor CourtFrankfurtFrankfurt Higher Regional CourtJudgmentJudgmentsMailolg

Weitere spannende Blogposts

Data protection in the digital age: Landmark ruling by Cologne Regional Court on the use of Google Analytics

Data protection in the digital age: Landmark ruling by Cologne Regional Court on the use of Google Analytics
11. May 2023

Introduction: An expected verdict and its effects The Cologne Regional Court has sent a signal with a ruling that was...

Read moreDetails

Cyber insurance refuses to pay benefits after hacker attack due to false information

d18d1e1d82c0cecc1bcb94866a5316f4
18. June 2024

In a ruling dated 23.05.2024 (Ref. 5 O 128/21), the Regional Court of Kiel ruled that a cyber insurance policy...

Read moreDetails

Video: Man do I have to mark advertising?

YouTube: What to do about copyright extortion?
7. November 2022

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3bnRUAGsqc When and where do I have to label advertising or a sponsorship and in what way? Some new rulings...

Read moreDetails

Epic Games’ victory in the antitrust dispute against Google Play Store: a turning point for the app economy?

Epic Games’ victory in the antitrust dispute against Google Play Store: a turning point for the app economy?
12. December 2023

Oh wow: Epic Games, the developer behind the world-famous game Fortnite, has scored a remarkable victory in an unprecedented antitrust...

Read moreDetails

German courts have jurisdiction at .de Domain

German courts have jurisdiction at .de Domain
20. March 2019

Time and again, especially with international Internet portals, the question arises as to whether German courts have jurisdiction, for example...

Read moreDetails

Understanding the cease-and-desist declaration: important insights from the BGH ruling of January 12, 2023

BGH considers Uber Black to be anti-competitive
19. May 2023

What was it about? In the world of competition law, the cease and desist letter is a key tool for...

Read moreDetails

BGH changes case law regarding receipt of cease-and-desist declaration

BGH considers Uber Black to be anti-competitive
9. January 2023

The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) has issued an exciting decision on trademark law. According to the decision, a new...

Read moreDetails

Cookies for advertising purposes only with the active consent of the user

ECJ: Cookies require explicit consent of users
5. June 2020

The BGH has ruled on the question of the requirements for consent to telephone advertising and the storage of cookies...

Read moreDetails

Simulated gambling does not lead to the indexing of a game

Simulated gambling does not lead to the indexing of a game
7. November 2022

The games "Coin Master," "Coin Trip" and "Coin Kingdom" are not harmful to minors within the meaning of the German...

Read moreDetails
European Cooperative Society (SCE)

European Cooperative Society (SCE)

16. October 2024

Definition and legal basis: The European Cooperative Society, also known as Societas Cooperativa Europaea (SCE), is a supranational legal form...

Read moreDetails
Independent professional association

Independent professional association

16. October 2024

Personality law

25. June 2023
European Economic Interest Grouping (EEIG)

European Economic Interest Grouping (EEIG)

16. October 2024
00ebe150159beb948ae5271d1270dfa8

Digital Services Act (DDigG)

9. November 2024

Podcast Folgen

d5e1e6cad87cb839a9e23af79034bd94

AI in the legal system: Towards a digital future of justice

16. October 2024

In this fascinating podcast episode, we take a deep dive into the world of artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact...

43a60cb39d7ea477ac8f3845c1b7739c

Legal advice for start-ups – investments that pay off

8. December 2024

This episode of the ITmedialaw.com podcast is all about the importance of legal advice for startups. Host Marian Härtel talks...

092def0649c76ad70f0883df970929cb

Influencers and gaming: legal challenges in the digital entertainment world

26. September 2024

In this captivating episode, lawyer Marian Härtel takes listeners on an exciting journey through the dynamic world of influencers and...

9e9bbb286e0d24cb5ca04eccc9b0c902

Legal challenges of innovative business models

1. October 2024

In this captivating podcast episode, I dive deep into the world of legal challenges associated with innovative business models as...

  • Privacy policy
  • Imprint
  • Contact
  • About lawyer Marian Härtel
Marian Härtel, Rathenaustr. 58a, 14612 Falkensee, info@itmedialaw.com

Marian Härtel - Rechtsanwalt für IT-Recht, Medienrecht und Startups, mit einem Fokus auf innovative Geschäftsmodelle, Games, KI und Finanzierungsberatung.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
  • Informationen
    • Ideal partner
    • About lawyer Marian Härtel
    • Quick and flexible access
    • Principles as a lawyer
    • Why a lawyer and business consultant?
    • Focus areas of attorney Marian Härtel
      • Focus on start-ups
      • Investment advice
      • Corporate law
      • Cryptocurrencies, Blockchain and Games
      • AI and SaaS
      • Streamers and influencers
      • Games and esports law
      • IT/IP Law
      • Law firm for GMBH,UG, GbR
      • Law firm for IT/IP and media law
    • The everyday life of an IT lawyer
    • How can I help clients?
    • Testimonials
    • Team: Saskia Härtel – WHO AM I?
    • Agile and lean law firm
    • Price overview
    • Various information
      • Terms
      • Privacy policy
      • Imprint
  • Services
    • Support and advice of agencies
    • Contract review and preparation
    • Games law consulting
    • Consulting for influencers and streamers
    • Advice in e-commerce
    • DLT and Blockchain consulting
    • Legal advice in corporate law: from incorporation to structuring
    • Legal compliance and expert opinions
    • Outsourcing – for companies or law firms
    • Booking as speaker
  • News
    • Gloss / Opinion
    • Law on the Internet
    • Online retail
    • Law and computer games
    • Law and Esport
    • Blockchain and web law
    • Data protection Law
    • Copyright
    • Labour law
    • Competition law
    • Corporate
    • EU law
    • Law on the protection of minors
    • Tax
    • Other
    • Internally
  • Podcast
    • ITMediaLaw Podcast
  • Knowledge base
    • Laws
    • Legal terms
    • Contract types
    • Clause types
    • Forms of financing
    • Legal means
    • Authorities
    • Company forms
    • Tax
    • Concepts
  • Videos
    • Information videos – about Marian Härtel
    • Videos – about me (Couch)
    • Blogpost – individual videos
    • Videos on services
    • Shorts
    • Podcast format
    • Third-party videos
    • Other videos
  • Contact
  • en English
  • de Deutsch
Kostenlose Kurzberatung