Wann endet die Verjährungsfrist für Schadensersatzansprüche?

VW emissions scandal.

The diesel emissions scandal has been keeping the courts busy for almost five years. Do I still have a chance to sue for damages or have all claims long since expired? Those affected who have not yet taken legal action are asking. Here you can find all the information about the statute of limitations in the emissions scandal.

Car buyers can usually assert warranty claims against the seller due to material defects up to two years after purchasing the vehicle. However, the illegal switch-off devices that VW installed in diesel cars represent intentional, immoral damage. This claim for damages is generally subject to a limitation period of three years until the end of the year. However, it is not clear when exactly this period begins. According to Section 199, Paragraph 1 No. 1 of the German Civil Code, it begins at the end of the year in which the damage occurs, i.e. when the illegal switch-off devices were installed in the vehicle. On the other hand, it is also relevant when the owner of the vehicle found out about the emissions manipulation and his claims (Section 199, Paragraph 1 No. 3 of the German Civil Code).

When did cheated diesel buyers know about their right to compensation?

This is exactly where the crux of the matter lies: when did the affected car owners really have knowledge of the emissions manipulation and their resulting claims against the manufacturers? From September 22, 2015, when VW in a ad hoc announcement about "irregularities in the development of diesel engines"? After the recall campaign by the Federal Motor Transport Authority began on October 15, 2015? Or could those affected only assume that they had claims for damages against VW in 2017, when the first courts had made consumer-friendly rulings?

The Trier Regional Court made a remarkable ruling on these questions (September 19, 2019, case number 5 O 417/18): The three-year limitation period can only begin once there is a decision by the highest court.

As long as there is no decision by the Federal Court of Justice, the legal situation must be regarded as unclear

Both the Frankfurt am Main Regional Court (judgment of February 5, 2020, case number 2-O4 O 321/19) and the Duisburg Regional Court (judgment of January 20, 2020, case number 4 O 165/19) have agreed with the Trier Regional Court's opinion. The latter even goes further. The judgment states:

"It is objectively unreasonable for an injured party to file a lawsuit because they cannot predict how a lawsuit will be decided by a court dealing with it. It ultimately depends on chance whether they will come across a panel that will uphold or reject their lawsuit. There is now a discernible trend within case law in favor of injured vehicle owners. However, as long as the Federal Court of Justice has not made a decision in a comparable case, the legal situation must be regarded as unclear. This does not place the defendant at an unreasonable disadvantage; it is in their power to bring about a decision by the Federal Court of Justice and thus a clarification of the legal situation."

As long as the Federal Court of Justice has not made a decision in the emissions cases, the time limit does not begin to run. It is interesting to note that the 6th Senate, which is responsible for the VW case, has already commented on the subject of the start of the limitation period in previous cases. For example, in a ruling of January 31, 1995, the court pointed out that an injured party "is not obliged to take their own initiative in the interests of the person who caused the damage ... to obtain information about the course of the damage and the identity of the person who caused the damage. In a further ruling (January 18, 2000, case number VI ZR 375/98), the Senate confirmed the legal opinion once again. Accordingly, injured car buyers do not have to take excessive action in the interests of the car companies in order to ensure that the limitation period begins early.