Search
Contact
Symbolbild zu Videokonferenztechnik in Gerichtsprozessen: Frau nimmt an Videokonferenz teil
16.01.2024 | KPMG Law Insights

Law to promote video conferencing technology in court proceedings

On November 17, 2023, the Bundestag passed a law to promote the use of video conferencing technology in civil and specialist courts. However, after the Bundesrat expressed reservations about the content, the Mediation Committee will first deal with the bill before the new rules can come into force.

The draft law aims to make the justice system more modern, digital and citizen-friendly. Video conferencing should become a natural part of everyday court life. Access to justice should be simple and modern for citizens. The use of video technology is to be raised to a new level in order to save time and resources and to speed up judicial decisions.

The draft law also provides for the possibility of setting up “virtual legal application offices” to communicate with citizens seeking justice via video conference. The draft bill also takes up proposals for amendments from the judiciary. The background: Video hearings and video evidence recordings enable faster and more cost-effective proceedings and thus make an important contribution to the modernization and digitalization of the justice system.

The draft provides for the following changes:

 

128a ZPO is to be revised

According to the draft law, the central standard for video hearings, Section 128a ZPO, will be revised. The court could then not only allow a video hearing to be held, but also order it. The parties to the proceedings would then have the opportunity to apply to be exempted from this order within a period to be determined.

If the parties agree that the oral hearing should be held as a video hearing, this should generally be ordered. If the court rejects an application for a video hearing, it would have to give reasons for this decision. The draft also provides for the possibility of fully virtual hearings in which the court is not present in the courtroom. The Federal Council has raised objections to this: According to it, the court should also be present in the courtroom during a video hearing in order to do justice to the special significance of the oral hearing.

In addition, according to the draft law, the taking of evidence, in particular the inspection of evidence, is to be possible via video conference.

 

Further changes for the court proceedings

The lump sum for expenses for the use of video conferencing technology in accordance with the Court Costs Acts is to be abolished under the draft law.

According to the Federal Ministry of Justice, the oral hearing, including the taking of evidence, may be recorded in audio and video in future, Section 160a ZPO-E. Previously, only audio recording was permitted. In certain proceedings, the parties should have the option of requesting audio or audiovisual documentation of witness statements.

 

Simplifications for citizens

Another planned innovation: According to the draft bill, it should be possible to submit applications and declarations for the minutes of the court registry via video to the court registry (Section 129a ZPO-E). This applies, for example, to applying for legal aid and filing a lawsuit with the local court.

The procedure for taking a statement of assets is to be extended so that it can be taken by video or at a location other than the offices of a bailiff or the debtor’s home (Section 802f ZPO-E).

 

Conclusion and outlook

The promotion of the use of video conferencing technology in the judiciary is to be welcomed. Conducting oral negotiations via video conferencing increases efficiency and contributes to cost savings, as travel costs and expenses are eliminated. In addition, video hearings make court hearings more accessible for people who have difficulty attending face-to-face hearings due to distance or physical limitations.

It remains to be seen how the bill will be revised by the mediation committee. Although the Federal Council supports the facilitation of video hearings, it would like to preserve the oral hearing in the courtroom as the heart of the court process. The countries reject purely virtual negotiations. When the law finally comes into force, it will become clear how quickly the new possibilities will be used in practice, and in particular how quickly the justice administrations of the Federal States will create the necessary technical requirements for video conferencing.

Explore #more

19.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

New Packaging Implementation Act tightens obligations for companies

With a new Packaging Implementation Act (VerpackDG), German law is to be adapted to the EU Packaging Regulation. The Federal Ministry for the Environment…

18.11.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law Statement in the FAZ on the subject of deepfakes

Fraudsters can easily falsify invoices or even act as company bosses. Companies can defend themselves against this, but there are no miracle weapons against AI…

17.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Video surveillance in rental properties: What should landlords be aware of?

Video surveillance of rented properties is only possible under strict legal conditions. More and more owners want to keep an eye on and secure their…

13.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Implementing AI in the legal department – these are the success factors

Artificial intelligence (AI) only benefits the legal department if it is implemented correctly. The technology promises to automate time-consuming routine work and fundamentally improve the…

13.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

First omnibus package to relax CSDDD, CSRD and EU taxonomy obligations

On November 13, 2025, the EU Parliament voted on its negotiating position regarding the so-called omnibus package, which provides for a relaxation of the CSRD,…

12.11.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law Statement in In-house Counsel: More stability under the umbrella of corporate governance

There is a lot of talk about “corporate governance” in the face of multiple crises and regulatory tendencies on the part of legislators. But what…

07.11.2025 | Deal Notifications

KPMG Law and KPMG advise Diehl Defence on the acquisition of the Tauber Group

KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH (KPMG Law) and KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft (KPMG) advised Diehl Defence on the acquisition of the Tauber Group. KPMG Law provided legal…

07.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

Changes to the H-1B visa and their consequences for US hiring and secondment practices

President Trump’s administration has introduced two significant changes to the highly popular H-1B visa program for skilled workers: The previous random lottery will be replaced…

07.11.2025 | In the media

KPMG Law Statement on HAUFE: Confusion surrounding the EU Deforestation Regulation – and what companies should do now

Possibly, perhaps, under certain circumstances, the EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) will not be binding for large and medium-sized enterprises on December 30, 2025 and for…

06.11.2025 | KPMG Law Insights

External personnel: authorities tighten checks with AI support

AI is a blessing for many companies, but it can also quickly become a curse, especially when authorities use the technology to uncover legal violations…

Contact

Dr. Matthias Aldejohann

Partner
Dresden Site Manager
Head of Litigation & ADR

Galeriestraße 2
01067 Dresden

Tel.: +49 351 21294411
maldejohann@kpmg-law.com

Miriam Golla

Senior Manager

Galeriestraße 2
01067 Dresden

Tel.: +49 351 21294412
miriamgolla@kpmg-law.com

© 2024 KPMG Law Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH, associated with KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, a public limited company under German law and a member of the global KPMG organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a Private English Company Limited by Guarantee. All rights reserved. For more details on the structure of KPMG’s global organisation, please visit https://home.kpmg/governance.

 KPMG International does not provide services to clients. No member firm is authorised to bind or contract KPMG International or any other member firm to any third party, just as KPMG International is not authorised to bind or contract any other member firm.

Scroll