My client, an accommodation provider with over 1,000 beds, had parking spaces secured by easements on neighboring property owned by a corporation. A dispute arose over the exclusivity of the parking space usage; this right was contested by the property owner, which threatened the existence of the business. A legal dispute was conducted over the exclusivity, which the Munich Higher Regional Court essentially decided in favor of my client. This success led to serious problems for the landowner that went far beyond the revocation of the claimed shared use. This was the lever for an overall solution that achieved significantly more than would have been possible with a complete success in court. The civil proceedings were conducted in a manner that kept the lines of communication open at all times. This was reflected in the negotiations. The solution that was reached fully reflected the interests of my clients and continues to form the basis of a stable and even friendly neighborhood relationship.

A landowner had acquired plots of land through a limited liability company and started a residential construction project. His aim was to restructure his finances. Loans amounting to millions were taken out. These were secured by extensive land holdings that had been owned by the noble family for centuries. The urban planning positioning of the project was convincing, but the initiator had chosen the wrong contractual partners and had not calculated the prices correctly. The apartments had been sold too cheaply. Due to the construction defects that had arisen, the purchasers withheld substantial payments. Ultimately, insolvency had to be declared due to insolvency. The proceedings were conducted under so-called self-administration. A new, experienced managing director was appointed.

My task was to devise, communicate, and implement a comprehensive solution as the consulting lawyer for the limited liability company. This was achieved in close consultation with the new managing director, the administrator appointed by the insolvency court, the banks, and the purchasers of the apartments. The shareholder made a financial contribution that preserved the family properties and was far less than the total loss of the family's assets through foreclosure. The financing banks accepted a partial write-off. The purchasers of the apartments were satisfied with a moderately reduced construction quality, but in addition to completion, they received the renovation write-off (Section 7 h EStG), which was decisive for their overall calculation – also with regard to the multiple financing arrangements entered into. Each party involved supported the solution because it was better for their own interests than any alternative.

A good friend from the media industry once told me in the context of his own divorce: “My wife and I were on the same set, but we weren't shooting the same movie.” That was the crux of the problem in a mediation case with significant economic implications. The parents had built up the company; their son was working successfully in the company as their designated successor. At the son's request, shares in the company had been transferred by notarized deed in order to claim tax exemption for business assets (Section 13a of the German Inheritance Tax Act); the parents had reserved the right of usufruct. From the parents' point of view, it had been agreed that the legal transfer of the shares should not change the economic ownership. The son, on the other hand, felt that he was the full legal and economic owner of the transferred shares. These differing views remained hidden at first. When a sale was discussed, the parents naturally claimed almost the entire proceeds for themselves. This left the son stunned. The conflict threatened to tear the family and the company apart. A senior partner at HengelerMueller recommended me to the family as a mediator. In the lengthy and demanding mediation process, my initial task was to develop options based on the interests and needs of the parties, which ultimately resulted in a term sheet. This was then translated into draft contracts by the tax and legal advisors of one of the “Big Four” accounting firms, which were then the subject of mediation under my guidance. The final notarial deed clarified all issues and remains the basis for legal relations and family peace to this day. A key to success was to foster a sufficient understanding among all parties involved for each other's perspectives and to address the complex father-son relationship in such a way that differences of opinion took a back seat to the consensus solution.