- The current German Bank Co-CEO Juergen Fitschen is accountable to process fraud on suspicion.
- With him on the dock, inter alia, the former German Bank chief Josef Ackermann and Rolf Breuer.
- A criminal prosecutor has recounted that it was absent for a witness appearance in the 25 times on the “necessary reminder” Kirch thing Fitschen.
By Hans Leyendecker and Klaus Ott
About the inside of a bank, the independent existence of a legal department and a world that is internally divided into “Pros” and “Cons” (popular “Pro” and “cons”), the general public from the end of April probably a lot of experience. Then the trial of the co-head of Deutsche Bank, Jürgen Fitschen, 66, as well as against four former executives of the largest German Institute begins before the 5th Criminal Chamber of the Munich District Court for alleged procedural fraud.
A spectacular process , an unusual process. Even the indictment is not usually – it is 627 pages thick. Almost a novel.
The files were sent to the Trial Chamber to include 143 volumes. Including 33 volumes of investigation files, 32 Evidence volumes, 44 volumes case files, as well as numerous Beiakten a special issue with confidential Langen from Deutsche Bank. Also included among records 26 volumes of copies from the civil proceedings before the Higher Regional Court (OLG) Munich, before which the dispute has been fought over for damages from the Kirch heirs against the German bank and its former CEO Rolf Breuer.
Cracking lost
When comparing the Kirch heirs had at the end, after all the wrangling receive 925 million euros. Kirch (blessed) won. The German bank lost crashing. The new process is to some extent the legacy of the old dispute. Spectacular he will be in any case.
Never were so many former or active Dax CEOs in the dock as in the process that the exquisite presiding judge will open Peter Noll end of April. Besides hinge plates and Breuer Josef Ackermann is charged, the predecessor of hinge plates. Ackermann is experienced in dealing with the justice system. He stood in the Mannesmann trial on suspicion of infidelity in court and paid 2006, around 3.2 million euros. The case was closed.
In addition to the trio are still Clemens Börsig, who was once chairman of the board of the bank, and accused the former board member of Tessenberg Heydebreck. It has not preserved the repentance before the trial. He could “today still stone” for the mistake he had made in the parish method, he once said at a hearing.
German bank Chefs who remain silent
The German Bank reported a profit, which nobody expected. However, the numbers look only at first glance look good. And in the major challenges we keep the boss Jürgen Fitschen and Anshu Jain covered.
The process naturally raises a number of questions that have little or nothing to do with the proceeding. Harms such a trial a financial institution? This is almost a Radio Yerevan issue nowadays. Essentially, yes, on the other hand, the German bank will act with its almost countless legal squabbles anyway like a huge legal department with attached banking on. So: It has been given as the opening of such a process more brand damage. More importantly, what does this mean for Fitschen, the co-chief? The case Ackermann has shown that a CEO the efforts of a trial may well agree with his daily work. Bad for fish that usually should be negotiated on Tuesdays. On Tuesdays often board meetings are held.
Fitschens co-chief mate is Anshu Jain, with whom he demonstratively goes well. Although the records of the bank in case Kirch show that sometimes there are very large differences between appearance and reality, but it would be premature to assume that followers of Jain (which are usually the beneficiaries with changes) are likely to have hope for a time after Fitschen.
Missing “necessary reminder”
Why Fitschen got to the dock, is a story of its own. The Co-Chief would have known nothing, could not remember a document and supposedly no one had him drawn to anything that went wrong. Something like the senior public prosecutor Christiane Serini has described the role of hinge plates in the parish case.
The criminal prosecutor has recounted that it lacked hinge plates at a witness appearance in the church thing at OLG “Remembrance necessary” 25 times in the have, but it was obvious that Fitschen by the “permanent instructions” that it Things are not exactly know, just a balancing act’ve tried: he wanted to, it certainly does the senior public prosecutor, make possible not misrepresent before the Court of Appeal and not make the same process strategy of the Bank in the parish method broken. Without the hinge plates trickery would not have gone. The criminal prosecutor goes to the accused of a “common Tatplan” from. Whether that really was so common as to whether some thought that you already get with a bit of cheating or even whether the allegations nothing’s turn to be seen.
It is that can be already guessed, be argued vigorously in court. Even on translations. The protocols German DAX companies are written in English and runs through the indictment in the face of a particular constellation, the question whether a statement such as “DB has been asked” mean that the institution was required, or whether mean, as the legal representative Deutsche Bank’s opinion that if the bank would be in demand times. Please not again: “Has been asked” said: “was asked.” The approval of the prosecution although there is no legal information, but Judge Noll has expressed in a fresh statement that he was “substantial doubt” have on a major thesis of the Court of Appeal in the compensation process. Therefore, the Trial Chamber will probably check the OLG results and some new roll.
No comments:
Post a Comment