Can Commercial Court Proceedings Be Conducted in English in Germany? (2025 Reforms Explained)

English in German commercial courts is now a realistic option for international litigants following the Act to Strengthen Germany as a Place of Justice (Gesetz zur Stärkung des Justizstandorts Deutschland), which entered into force on 1 April 2025 and enables the German Länder to establish designated Commercial Courts and Commercial Chambers that can conduct proceedings in English. For cross-border businesses that have long resisted German litigation because of the language barrier, this is a material change to forum strategy. This article explains the baseline rules under the German Code of Civil Procedure (Zivilprozessordnung, ZPO) and the Courts Constitution Act (Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz, GVG), what the reforms actually altered, and how to plan for it in contracts, filings and enforcement.

It is written for general counsel, heads of legal and international litigators who need a working playbook rather than market commentary.

Can proceedings be conducted in English? An overview under the reforms

The short answer is that English in German commercial courts is available in more situations than ever before, but within a defined framework rather than as a general right. To understand what changed, you first need the baseline rule.

Baseline rule, language of proceedings in Germany

The default position is set out in the Courts Constitution Act, which provides that the language of the court in Germany is German. That baseline governs pleadings, oral hearings, the taking of evidence, and the judgment itself. Documents submitted in a foreign language may be required to be accompanied by a German translation, and witnesses giving evidence in another language would typically be examined through an interpreter. The ZPO governs the conduct of civil proceedings, the admissibility and taking of evidence, and the allocation of costs, all of which historically assumed German as the working language of the process.

This baseline is important because it explains why, before the reforms, running a genuinely English-language case in a German state court was impractical: even where the parties and judges were comfortable in English, the formal record, the judgment and much of the documentary evidence had to be produced or translated into German.

What the reforms changed

The Act to Strengthen Germany as a Place of Justice created the legal basis for conducting commercial disputes in English before specially designated Commercial Courts and Commercial Chambers. In outline, the reforms allow each Land to establish, by ordinance, Commercial Courts at the level of the Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht) for higher-value commercial matters, and Commercial Chambers at the Regional Court (Landgericht), each of which may conduct proceedings in English where the relevant conditions are met. The practical effect is that qualifying commercial matters, typically higher-value, cross-border business disputes, can be heard with English as the language of proceedings, including pleadings, oral argument and, in principle, the reasoning of the court.

Because implementation is left to each Land, the availability of English-language proceedings varies across Germany and depends on whether the relevant Land has exercised its power to designate such a court or chamber. Counsel should confirm the current position in the target Land before relying on it.

The mechanism is best understood as conditional and largely consensual. Availability depends on several things converging: the relevant Land having designated a court or chamber for English-language proceedings; the dispute falling within the defined commercial scope (and, for Commercial Courts, above the applicable value threshold); and the parties either having agreed to it or the court exercising its discretion to permit it. Where those conditions are met, English in German commercial courts moves from theoretical to genuinely usable.

Limits, what falls outside the scope

The expansion is deliberately narrow. It targets commercial disputes between businesses. Matters outside that category, public law proceedings, family law, criminal matters and most consumer-protection litigation, remain firmly within the German-language default. Even within scope, courts retain discretion and may impose conditions, for example requiring German translations of specific documents or of the final judgment where that is necessary for the record, for third parties, or for later enforcement. In other words, the reforms open a door; they do not remove the German-language architecture of the wider court system.

How to request or agree English as the language of proceedings

Securing English proceedings in Germany depends less on the moment a dispute erupts than on decisions taken long before. There are two principal routes: agreeing English contractually, and applying to the court. In practice, the strongest position combines both.

Agreement in the contract, effective drafting

The most reliable way to preserve the ability to conduct English proceedings in German commercial courts is to agree it in the underlying contract. A well-drafted clause should (a) submit disputes to the jurisdiction of a specific German court or courts designated for English-language commercial proceedings, (b) elect English as the language of proceedings, and (c) sit alongside a compatible choice-of-law provision. A language election is persuasive to the court and signals the parties’ informed, mutual intention, but it does not override the court’s own competence rules or public-interest limits, so the drafting must align with the statutory framework rather than assume it.

A short sample party-agreed clause might read:

“The parties submit all disputes arising out of or in connection with this Agreement to the exclusive jurisdiction of the competent German court designated to conduct commercial proceedings in English, and agree that the language of proceedings shall be English. German law governs this Agreement.”

Annotated notes: name the specific competent court where possible; confirm the relevant Land has in fact designated a court or chamber for English-language commercial matters; check that the value and subject matter fall within scope; and ensure the governing-law clause is consistent with litigating in that forum. A language clause is only as good as the jurisdiction clause it accompanies.

Application to the court, procedural steps and timing

Where the contract is silent, or where the parties reach agreement only after a dispute has arisen, the route is an application to the court. The party seeking English proceedings should raise the request at the earliest opportunity, ideally in or with the initiating pleading, and set out the basis: the commercial nature of the dispute, the cross-border character of the parties, any existing agreement or common practice in English, and the practical efficiencies of proceeding in English. The request to conduct proceedings in English is stronger where it is supported by both parties and where the court is one already designated to hear such matters.

Opposing party objections and how courts resolve conflicts

An opponent may resist English proceedings on several grounds: that the matter falls outside the designated commercial scope, that a party would be prejudiced by proceeding in a language it does not command, or that certain evidence or third-party interests require German. Where the parties disagree, the court will weigh the competing positions, the terms of any language agreement, and the practical fairness of proceeding in English. A clear, mutual contractual election materially reduces the scope for such objections, which is precisely why the contract-stage decision matters so much.

Practical checklist for filing the request

• Confirm eligibility. Check the dispute is a qualifying commercial matter and that the target court is designated for English-language proceedings in the relevant Land.
• Attach the agreement. Include any contractual language and jurisdiction clause relied upon.
• Justify the request. Set out the cross-border character and practical case for English.
• Prepare translations. Have German translations ready for any documents the court may require, and for the judgment if needed for enforcement.
• Raise it early. Make the request in the first pleading to avoid procedural delay.

Translations, witness evidence and hearing conduct, rules and cost implications

Choosing to run proceedings in English in German commercial courts does not eliminate the German-language system; it operates alongside it. Understanding where German still intrudes, and who pays for it, is central to budgeting the case realistically.

Documentary evidence and translation expectations

Where proceedings are conducted in English, the court will generally accept pleadings and much documentary evidence in English. However, the court retains the ability to require German translations for specific documents, particularly where a document must enter the formal record in German, where a third party or authority requires it, or where the judgment itself will be issued or later enforced in German. Under the ZPO, the taking of evidence and the treatment of documents remain subject to the court’s directions, so counsel should plan for a hybrid reality: predominantly English, with German translation for defined items.

Witness statements and testimony

Where the court permits, witnesses may be examined in English, which is one of the real advantages of English proceedings for international parties, it removes the friction and distortion of interpreting business testimony. Nonetheless, the court may order interpreting services where a witness is not comfortable in English, or require witness evidence to be recorded or translated into German for the record. The practical approach is to identify each witness’s working language early, decide whether interpreting is needed, and prepare bilingual materials where that reduces risk and delay.

Expert evidence and translations

Expert reports raise similar issues. An expert instructed by the parties may report in English, but a court-appointed expert, or the need to place an expert opinion on the German record, can trigger translation requirements. Where expert evidence is central to the dispute, agree the language of the report in advance and budget for translation of any expert material that must be produced in German.

Who bears translation costs

Translation costs are, in principle, part of the costs of the proceedings and follow the ordinary cost-allocation rules under the ZPO. That typically means costs shift with the outcome, subject to the court’s directions and any recoverability limits. For budgeting purposes, however, the paying party’s practical exposure is the whole translation bill in the first instance, with recovery dependent on success and on the court’s cost order. Treat translation as a real, front-loaded cost, not an afterthought.

Practical tips to control translation costs

• Batch translation. Translate documents in coordinated tranches rather than piecemeal to reduce duplicated effort and rush fees.
• Bilingual bundles. Prepare bilingual hearing bundles only for documents genuinely likely to require German, not the entire file.
• Limit certified translation. Reserve certified translation for documents the court actually requires certified, and use standard translation elsewhere.
• Use qualified translators early. Engaging appropriately qualified legal translators early avoids re-work and challenges to accuracy.
• Plan for the judgment. If enforcement abroad is likely, budget from the outset for a certified translation of the final judgment.

Illustrative only: translation costs for a document-heavy commercial dispute can range from modest four-figure sums for a lean case to substantial five-figure sums where large volumes of certified translation and multiple witness statements are involved. These are indicative ranges to prompt budgeting, not fixed figures; the actual cost turns entirely on document volume, certification requirements and case complexity.

Choosing forum and language, English-language German litigation vs arbitration vs foreign forum

The ability to run proceedings in English in German commercial courts widens the menu of options, but it does not make German litigation the automatic answer. The right choice depends on what the parties value most: enforceability, confidentiality, speed, cost, control of language, or the availability of appeal.

Headline factors

The decision usually turns on a familiar set of variables: how easily a resulting decision can be enforced where the assets are; whether the parties need confidentiality; how quickly a binding outcome is achievable; the cost profile; how much control each side has over language and evidence; and whether an appellate route is desirable or a drawback. English-language German litigation now scores well on language control while retaining the enforcement and appellate features of a state court.

When a German commercial court in English is preferable

English proceedings in a German commercial court are attractive where cross-border parties want the procedural rigour, judicial expertise and public enforceability of a state court, combined with the convenience of English. It is a strong option where at least one party has assets or operations in Germany or the EU, where an appellate check on the first-instance decision is valued, and where interim or interlocutory relief from a state court is important.

When arbitration or a foreign forum is preferable

Arbitration is often preferable where confidentiality is paramount, where the parties want finality with limited appeal, or where a neutral seat is important for parties from different jurisdictions. Enforcement of arbitral awards benefits from the New York Convention regime across many states. A foreign court, for example in England or France, may be preferable where the governing law, the parties’ familiarity, or the location of assets points elsewhere.

Comparison table: English-language German commercial litigation vs arbitration vs foreign forum

Use the table as a starting framework, then weight the factors to the specific deal: where are the assets, how sensitive is the dispute, how much does finality matter, and which language genuinely serves the parties. For many Franco-German and other intra-EU commercial relationships, the arrival of English-language proceedings in German commercial courts tips the balance towards German litigation in situations where language previously ruled it out.

Recommended decision checklist for contracting parties

• Identify where enforcement is most likely to be needed and confirm the option that enforces most easily there.
• Decide whether confidentiality is a genuine requirement or a preference.
• Determine whether appellate review is an asset or a liability for your position.
• Assess whether interim relief from a state court is likely to matter.
• Match the language election to the parties’ real working language and to a designated forum.

Practical playbook, step-by-step checklist for counsel and in-house teams

The value of the reforms is realised through disciplined execution from the contract stage through to enforcement. This playbook maps the workflow for running proceedings in English in German commercial courts end to end.

Pre-filing

Get the contract right first. Confirm the jurisdiction clause points to a court designated for English-language commercial proceedings, elect English as the language, and align the choice-of-law clause. In parallel, put in place evidence-preservation measures so that key documents and communications are retained in a form that will be usable, and translatable, later.

Filing

When the dispute crystallises, plead in English where permitted, request English proceedings expressly and early, and adopt an English-language bundle strategy from the outset. Identify at the filing stage the limited category of documents that may require German translation, so that translation is commissioned in a controlled, batched way rather than under time pressure.

Hearings and witness preparation

Confirm each witness’s working language and arrange interpreting only where genuinely needed. Prepare bilingual bundles selectively. Prepare witness material in English where the witness is comfortable, and arrange German translations only where the court requires them for the record. Brief witnesses on the format of examination in an English-language hearing.

Post-judgment enforcement

Plan enforcement backwards from the judgment. If recognition or enforcement abroad is anticipated, arrange a certified translation of the judgment and confirm the local procedural steps in the enforcement jurisdiction. Within the EU, the Brussels recognition framework simplifies enforcement, but practical steps and translations are still typically required, and outside the EU the process is more involved.

Sample application paragraph

“The Claimant respectfully requests that these proceedings be conducted in the English language before the designated Commercial Court/Chamber, the dispute being a commercial matter between cross-border business parties who have agreed English as the language of proceedings in clause [ ] of the [Agreement]. German translations of documents required by the Court will be provided on direction.”

Pre-filing checklist (10 items)

Case notes and Franco-German practical examples

The following anonymised vignettes illustrate how the choice to use English in German commercial courts plays out in practice. They are illustrative and do not disclose confidential facts.

Example 1: a Franco-German supplier dispute handled in English

A French manufacturer and a German distributor fell into dispute over a supply agreement governed by German law, with a jurisdiction clause pointing to a German court and English as the language of proceedings. Because the parties had agreed the language election in advance and the matter was a qualifying commercial dispute, the proceedings ran in English. Business witnesses on both sides gave evidence in English, avoiding the distortion of interpreted commercial testimony, and only a limited set of technical documents required German translation. The parties benefited from a state-court judgment enforceable across the EU, with the language friction that had historically deterred German litigation removed at source.

Example 2: when English was refused

In a second scenario, a party sought to move an existing German-language dispute into English mid-proceedings, without any contractual language election and over the objection of its opponent, who did not command English comfortably. The court declined, weighing fairness to the objecting party and the absence of any prior agreement. The lesson is stark: the reforms reward parties who plan the language question at the contract stage, and offer far less to those who raise it opportunistically once a dispute is underway.

Practical takeaways for cross-border teams

• Agree the language of proceedings in the contract, do not rely on requesting it later.
• Match the language clause to a court actually designated for English-language commercial matters in the relevant Land.
• Budget for a limited, defined layer of German translation.
• Confirm each side’s genuine capacity to litigate in English to reduce the risk of objection.
• Plan enforcement, including judgment translation, from the outset.

Conclusion and next steps

The reforms introduced by the Act to Strengthen Germany as a Place of Justice make English in German commercial courts a practical, credible option for international businesses that previously discounted German litigation on language grounds. The opportunity is real but conditional: it depends on the relevant Land having designated a Commercial Court or Chamber, a qualifying commercial dispute, and, in almost every case that runs smoothly, a language election agreed in the contract before the dispute arises. Get the jurisdiction, language and governing-law clauses aligned at drafting, budget realistically for the defined layer of German translation that survives the reforms, and plan enforcement backwards from the judgment.

Businesses should review their standard commercial contracts now, in light of the reforms, and decide deliberately whether English-language German litigation, arbitration, or a foreign forum best serves each relationship.

For tailored clause drafting, a translation and cost budget, or a litigation-readiness audit built around the new English-language regime, speak to an English-speaking commercial litigator in Germany. You can review the Götz Gaiser, author profile for a bilingual practitioner perspective, explore Commercial Litigation, Germany, or consult the directory of English-speaking commercial litigators in Germany. Related cluster guidance covers how to draft language and jurisdiction clauses to enable English proceedings in Germany, checklists for evidence, witness statements and translation rules for English hearings, and the costs and enforcement implications of English litigation versus arbitration.

Sources

1. German Code of Civil Procedure (Zivilprozessordnung, ZPO), consolidated text
2. Courts Constitution Act (Gerichtsverfassungsgesetz, GVG), consolidated text
3. Federal Ministry of Justice (Bundesministerium der Justiz, BMJ)
4. Federal Law Gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt, BGBl)
5. Federal Bar Association (Bundesrechtsanwaltskammer, BRAK)
6. Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH)
7. Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law (MPIPRIV)
8. European e-Justice Portal