US-Beweisregeln bei Vergleichsverhandlungen

05.03.2010836 Mal gelesen
Compromise and Offers to Compromise – Begriffe im Zusammenhang mit Vergleichsverhandlungen nach US-Recht

Hintergrund dieses Begriffes ist die Rule 408 der Federal Rules of Evidence:

Rule 408. Compromise and Offers to Compromise

(a) Prohibited uses.?Evidence of the following is not admissible on behalf of any party, when offered to prove liability for, invalidity of, or amount of a claim that was disputed as to validity or amount, or to impeach through a prior inconsistent statement or contradiction:

(1) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish or accepting or offering or promising to accept a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise the claim ; and

(2) conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations regarding the claim, except when offered in a criminal case and the negotiations related to a claim by a public office or agency in the exercise of regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority.

Permitted uses. This rule does not require exclusion if the evidence is offered for purposes not prohibited by subdivision (a). Examples of permissible purposes include proving a witness?s bias or prejudice ; negating a contention of undue delay; and proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution.

Zusätzliche Anmerkung (aus einer Kommentierung): "Under present law, in most jurisdictions, statements of fact made during settlement negotiations, however, are excepted from this ban and are admissible. The only escape from admissibility of statements of fact made in a settlement negotiation as if the declarant or his representative expressly states that the statement is hypothetical in nature or is made without prejudice. Rule 408 as submitted by the Court reversed the traditional rule."

Unwägbarkeiten nach dieser Regel 408 können Sie im Rahmen einer Vertraulichkeitsvereinbarung eingrenzen, wobei das US-Recht keine wie in Deutschland gängigen Vertragsstraferegelungen erlaubt. In den Vergleichsgesprächen und im diesbezüglichem Schriftverkehr sollte als weitere flankierende Maßnahme darauf hingewiesen werden dass "this statement is hypothetical in nature" oder "is made without prejudice" oder "for settlement purposes only ? not admissible! Bei Fragen wenden Sie sich an NIETZER & HÄUSLER. oder checken Sie ab und an die US Blogs www.gerichtsreporter.us oder www.usa-recht.de