Was hat der BGH am 9. März 2026 entschieden?

Der Bundesgerichtshof hat erstmalig höchstrichterlich über Anspürche einer gegen das Corona-Virus geimpften Person wegen behaupteter Impfschäden gegen den Impfstoffhersteller entschieden. Er stellte fest, dass das Oberlandesgericht Koblenz die Anforderungen an den Auskunftsanspruch zu eng gesetzt hatte. Für die erforderliche Plausibilität eines Zusammenhangs zwischen Impfstoff und Schaden ist es nicht notwendig, dass die Kausalität überwiegend wahrscheinlich ist. Das Verfahren wurde zurückverwiesen; über etwaigen Schadensersatz ist noch nicht entschieden.

Was genau kann ich vom Hersteller verlangen?

Der Auskunftsanspruch nach § 84a AMG richtet sich auf dem pharmazeutischen Unternehmer bekannte Wirkungen, Nebenwirkungen und Wechselwirkungen sowie bekannt gewordene Verdächtsfälle. Darüber hinaus umfasst er alle weiteren Erkenntnisse, die für die Bewertung der Vertretbarkeit schädlicher Wirkungen von Bedeutung sein können. Laut BGH ist der Anspruch umfassend und beschränkt sich nicht auf das konkrete Krankheitsbild der betroffenen Person.

Bedeutet das Urteil automatisch Schadensersatz?

Nein. Das Urteil des BGH betrifft ausschließlich den Auskunftsanspruch, nicht den Schadensersatzanspruch. Das Verfahren wurde an das OLG Koblenz zurückverwiesen, das nun neu prüfen muss. Ob ein Schadensersatzanspruch nach § 84 AMG besteht, hängt von weiteren Voraussetzungen ab, insbesondere davon, ob der Impfstoff zum relevanten Zeitpunkt ein allgemein negatives Risiko-Nutzen-Verhältnis aufwies. Diese Prüfung ist anspruchsvoll und individuell.

Welche Impfstoffe sind betroffen?

Das BGH-Urteil erging konkret zum AstraZeneca-Impfstoff Vaxzevria. Der Auskunftsanspruch nach § 84a AMG gilt jedoch grundsätzlich für alle in Deutschland zugelassenen Arzneimittel, also auch für andere Corona-Impfstoffe. Ob im konkreten Fall die Voraussetzungen erfüllt sind, ist individuell zu prüfen.

Sind Verjährungsfristen zu beachten?

Ja. Sowohl der Auskunftsanspruch als auch ein etwaiger Schadensersatzanspruch nach dem AMG unterliegen Verjährungsfristen. Wenn Sie bisher noch keine rechtlichen Schritte eingeleitet haben, sollten Sie nicht länger zuwarten und rechtliche Beratung einholen.

Wann sollte ich einen Anwalt einschalten?

Wenn Sie nach einer Corona-Schutzimpfung anhaltende gesundheitliche Beschädigungen haben und einen Zusammenhang mit der Impfung für möglich halten, ist frühzeitige rechtliche Beratung sinnvoll. Das gilt insbesondere, wenn Verjährungsfristen laufen könnten. Sind Sie rechtsschutzversichert, sollten Sie vorab klären, ob die Versicherung die Kosten der Beratung und Vertretung übernimmt.

+49 211 / 819770

Inquiries

Experienced lawyers specializing in vaccine injuries

Corona vaccine injury?
The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) strengthens your chances of success.

What those affected need to know now – and how to obtain the manufacturer's data.

The Federal Court of Justice has ruled for the first time at the highest court level: Anyone who can plausibly demonstrate a connection between the COVID-19 vaccination and health damage is entitled to comprehensive information from the manufacturer. Rogert & Ulbrich supports those affected in enforcing this right – objectively and without false promises.

Information before legal action

Federal Court of Justice (BGH) ruling 2026

Operating nationwide

Attorney Marco Rogert

Lawyer • Vaccine injuries

ISC - New request

legal expenses insurance

Did you have legal expenses insurance at the time the vaccination caused the damage?

Yes

Which insurance company?

What is your insurance number?

Amount of deductible

€

How can we contact you?

Salutation

Mister

Woman

academic title

Prof.

Dr.

First name

Last name

e-mail

phone number

Street

House number

zip code

Location

processing status

acquisition lawyer email

Date of initial consultation

time of initial consultation

status

demolition reason

clerk

assistance

EHV

Yes

success fee agreement

notes

Digital Notes

Maximale Dateigröße: 20MB

contact

Salutation

RSV

First name

Last name

e-mail

phone number

UTM patameter

utm_medium

utm_source

utm_campaign

utm_content

utm_term

ommatic_id

Falls Du menschlich bist, lasse dieses Feld leer.

Why experienced legal support is crucial

Information asymmetry

All internal data on side effects and suspected cases are held by the manufacturer – not by the affected person.

The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) lowers the hurdles.

The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) ruling of March 9, 2026, states that plausibility is sufficient – preponderance of probability is no longer required.

No voluntary information provided

Experience shows that vaccine manufacturers do not provide the required information without legal action.

Information before compensation

Only with the manufacturer's information can it be assessed whether and which further steps are justifiable.

Submit a request

Federal Court of Justice ruling on Corona vaccine injuries – what the decision means for those affected

The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) ruling of March 9, 2026, is an important step for people with potential vaccine injuries. In our article you will learn more:

What the right to information under Section 84a of the German Medicines Act (AMG) means

What conditions must be met?

Why information and compensation are two different issues

Benefit from valuable tips from our experts and check your right to information.

Check your right to information now

Have you experienced any adverse effects after receiving a COVID-19 vaccination?

Do you recognize yourself in any of these situations? You are not alone – Rogert & Ulbrich will examine your case objectively and without false promises.

Thrombosis (VITT) after AstraZeneca

Have cerebral, abdominal, or intestinal vein thromboses been observed in connection with thrombocytopenia following vaccination with Vaxzevria?

Hearing loss or tinnitus

Did you experience a sudden loss of hearing or persistent tinnitus after vaccination, which is closely related in time to the vaccination?

Myocarditis / Pericarditis

Was myocarditis or pericarditis diagnosed after an mRNA vaccination (BioNTech/Pfizer or Moderna)?

Neurological complaints

Are you suffering from medically diagnosed neurological impairments such as paralysis, memory problems, or persistent headaches after vaccination?

Officially recognized vaccine injury

Your vaccination injury has already been recognized by a professional association or a social welfare office – but you haven't yet received any information from the manufacturer?

3 steps to legal clarity

Our structured process helps you understand your legal position and take targeted action.

Describe the case & investigate

Describe your case and submit your medical records. Rogert & Ulbrich will examine whether the requirements for a right to information under Section 84a of the German Medicines Act (AMG) are met.

Enforce disclosure

The request for information is formulated to the pharmaceutical company and – if necessary – enforced in court.

Assess further course of action

Based on the information gathered, a professional assessment is made as to which further steps are sensible and justifiable. The outcome depends on the individual case.

Hire us now

Frequently Asked Questions

Answers to the most important questions regarding the right to information in cases of COVID-19 vaccination injuries

What did the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) decide on March 9, 2026?

The Federal Court of Justice has issued its first ruling on a claim by a person vaccinated against the coronavirus for alleged vaccine injuries against the vaccine manufacturer. It found that the Higher Regional Court of Koblenz had set the requirements for the right to information too narrowly. For the necessary plausibility of a connection between the vaccine and the injury, it is not necessary that causality be more likely than not. The case was remanded; a decision on potential damages has not yet been made.

What exactly can I demand from the manufacturer?

The right to information under Section 84a of the German Medicines Act (AMG) pertains to effects, side effects, and interactions known to the pharmaceutical company, as well as any suspected cases. Furthermore, it encompasses all other findings that may be relevant for assessing the acceptability of harmful effects. According to the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH), this right is comprehensive and not limited to the specific medical condition of the affected individual.

Does the verdict automatically mean compensation?

No. The Federal Court of Justice's ruling concerns only the right to information, not the claim for damages. The case has been remanded to the Higher Regional Court of Koblenz, which must now re-examine the matter. Whether a claim for damages exists under Section 84 of the German Medicines Act (AMG) depends on further requirements, in particular whether the vaccine exhibited a generally negative risk-benefit ratio at the relevant time. This assessment is complex and requires individual attention.

Which vaccines are affected?

The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) ruling specifically concerned the AstraZeneca vaccine Vaxzevria. However, the right to information under Section 84a of the German Medicines Act (AMG) generally applies to all medicinal products authorized in Germany, including other COVID-19 vaccines. Whether the requirements are met in a specific case must be examined on a case-by-case basis.

Are there any limitation periods to be observed?

Yes. Both the right to information and any potential claim for damages under the German Medicines Act (AMG) are subject to limitation periods. If you have not yet taken legal action, you should not wait any longer and seek legal advice.

When should I consult a lawyer?

If you experience persistent health problems after a COVID-19 vaccination and suspect a connection to the vaccination, seeking legal advice early is advisable. This is especially true if statutes of limitations may be running. If you have legal expenses insurance, you should clarify beforehand whether the insurance company will cover the costs of consultation and representation.

Submit a request

Corona vaccine injury?
The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) strengthens your chances of success.

legal expenses insurance

How can we contact you?

processing status

contact

UTM patameter

Why experienced legal support is crucial

Federal Court of Justice ruling on Corona vaccine injuries – what the decision means for those affected

Have you experienced any adverse effects after receiving a COVID-19 vaccination?

Thrombosis (VITT) after AstraZeneca

Hearing loss or tinnitus

Myocarditis / Pericarditis

Neurological complaints

Officially recognized vaccine injury

Other persistent health problems

3 steps to legal clarity

Describe the case & investigate

Enforce disclosure

Assess further course of action

Frequently Asked Questions

Rogert & Ulbrich

consumer protection

B2B

Corona vaccine injury?The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) strengthens your chances of success.

legal expenses insurance

How can we contact you?

processing status

contact

UTM patameter

Why experienced legal support is crucial

Federal Court of Justice ruling on Corona vaccine injuries – what the decision means for those affected

Have you experienced any adverse effects after receiving a COVID-19 vaccination?

Thrombosis (VITT) after AstraZeneca

Hearing loss or tinnitus

Myocarditis / Pericarditis

Neurological complaints

Officially recognized vaccine injury

Other persistent health problems

3 steps to legal clarity

Describe the case & investigate

Enforce disclosure

Assess further course of action

Frequently Asked Questions

Corona vaccine injury?
The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) strengthens your chances of success.