The client accepted the work, as documented in a written report. The contractor then submitted a final invoice demanding the remaining payment. (Photo: © Andriy Popov/123RF.com)
Read aloud:
Payment is due even if the invoice has not been internally approved by the client. The Federal Court of Justice has upheld a ruling by the Higher Regional Court of Schleswig, strengthening the position of construction companies.
A clause in a construction contract, according to which the payment period only begins when the architect sends the invoice releases, is ineffectiveFurthermore: If the client has an architect negotiate the construction contracts, he must accept responsibility for the architect's actions. zurechnen to let.
Another issue is that Architects at all no legal Being allowed to conduct negotiations: That is prohibited. Legal services to Section 3 of the Legal Services Act (RDG)Contract drafting is a matter for lawyers. However, this point was not at issue in the trial.
The client commissioned the contractor to build a residential building under a German Civil Code (BGB) construction contract. An architect prepared and negotiated the contract. The contract stipulated: Only when the architect... Release invoice, begins the Payment deadline for interim and final invoices. Additionally, the contractor should submit the final invoice within 30 days of acceptance and provide a warranty bond.
The building owner took performance per protocol . With the final invoice, the building contractor demanded the remaining amount. Remuneration.
Operations management
Operations management
Operations management
The building owner refused, arguing that the claim was still valid. not dueBecause not all the conditions of the contract had yet been met. Furthermore, he wanted to withhold payment because the contractor had not provided the required security deposit. The contractor then took the matter to court.
The Schleswig Higher Regional Court ruled in favor of the construction contractor: The wages is due. The Federal Court of Justice upheld the decision: The clauses in the contract do not prevent the payment from becoming due, because it concerns ineffective general terms and conditions (GTC) concerns.
That the architect The fact that the contract has been formulated does not help the client; he must consider the architect's conduct. zurechnen let him. The architect had designed it for him as Closing assistant The court ruled that it was sufficient that he had drafted the construction contract with the client's consent, negotiated with the contractor, and presented the contract for signature.
Therefore, the legal rules apply: The building owner must, within the 30-day period of the Section 650g (4) sentence 3 BGB of no objection The verifiability of the final invoice has been challenged. Therefore, it is crucial for the Due date only on the Handover Completion The client has explained this here.
The right of retention due to the promised but unprovided warranty bond also does not apply, because according to the ruling, this clause also constitutes a invalid terms and conditions represents.
"Those who relinquish control over contract drafting, "In the end, he bears the consequences," commented Lawyer Thomas Ryll"If an architect or other concluding assistant prepares the contract for one party, that party may later..." not simply claim that she had the Clauses "Not made by themselves or not sure how often the other person intends to use them."
Federal Court of Justice, decision of 25 February 2026, file no. VII ZR 146/24: Appeal against the refusal of leave to appeal dismissed against the judgment of the Higher Regional Court of Schleswig of 21 August 2024. Ref. 12 U 29/23, that thus legally binding at a hunt.
The advisors at the Chambers of Crafts will be happy to help you with any legal questions!
DHB now also digital!Simply click here and register for the digital German Crafts Journal (DHB)!
Newsletter
Write a comment