Sven Adam Law Firm – The homepage of the Sven Adam Law Firm in Göttingen

Welcome

... on the website of the Sven Adam law firm in Göttingen.

The focus of our fundamentally supra-regional activities is currently all areas of social law as well as criminal defense and ancillary prosecutions. We also primarily work in administrative law (particularly police and regulatory law as well as assembly law).

Social law

Nowadays there are a variety of situations and legal issues in which you can be confronted with the entire area of social law. This affects areas such as basic security for job seekers (ALG II), employment promotion (including ALG I), BaFöG, child benefit, parental benefit, child and youth welfare law, health insurance, accident insurance, nursing care insurance, pension insurance and severely disabled law .

Useful links in the area of social law

Special pages in social law

Recent decisions in social law

26.04.2024Stuttgart Social Court - Decision of April 17, 2024 - Ref.: S 11 AY 107/23 ER
Norms: § 3 AsylbLG, § 3a AsylbLG, § 86b Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 SGG - Keywords: standard needs level 1, standard needs level 2, benefits according to §§ 3, 3a AsylbLG, costs after settlement through departure, Stuttgart Social Court
19.04.2024Stuttgart Social Court - Decision of April 18, 2024 - Ref.: S 9 AY 792/24 ER
Norms: § 3 AsylbLG, § 3a AsylbLG, § 86b Para. 2 Sentence 2 SGG - Keywords: standard needs level 1, standard needs level 2, benefits according to §§ 3, 3a AsylbLG, Stuttgart Social Court
18.04.2024Speyer Social Court - Decision of April 11, 2024 - Ref.: S 15 AY 3/24 ER
Norms: § 3 AsylbLG, § 3a AsylbLG, § 86b Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 SGG - Keywords: standard needs level 1, standard needs level 2, benefits according to §§ 3, 3a AsylbLG, Speyer Social Court
16.04.2024Trier Social Court - Decision of April 15, 2024 - Ref.: S 3 AY 7/24 ER
Norms: § 3 AsylbLG, § 3a AsylbLG, § 86b Para. 2 Sentence 2 SGG - Keywords: standard needs level 1, standard needs level 2, benefits according to §§ 3, 3a AsylbLG, Trier Social Court

Criminal defense and co-prosecution

Your role in criminal proceedings can have different facets.

You can be the accused or accused, co-plaintiff, victim or witness. In any case, there are a number of things that you will face in criminal proceedings that a lawyer can and should inform you about. But nowhere can a lawyer be as fundamentally important as when it comes to the question of a conviction in criminal law.

The lawyer therefore plays an important role for you, particularly in criminal defense. Various rights regulated in the Code of Criminal Procedure give you options for defending yourself, even in the preliminary proceedings, which you may not be aware of or which you do not have. We would be happy to advise you at every stage of the procedure (investigative, criminal or penal enforcement proceedings) tailored to your personal situation.

Useful links in the area of criminal law

Police and regulatory law / right of assembly

The averting measures usually carried out by the police include complex situations in everyday life in which you can be confronted with law enforcement authorities.

As soon as you have been classified as a so-called “troublemaker”, the authorities have various legal instruments at their disposal to restrict your rights. This can include expulsions, detention or so-called identification treatment. The subsequent effects of security measures can also sometimes be significant. On the basis of general evaluation criteria, such as the principle of proportionality and correct “disruptive selection”, such regulatory measures must be questioned, submitted for review by the administrative courts and then the effects (e.g. data storage) eliminated. Particularly in connection with gatherings in public spaces, expulsions, detentions and identification processing are now part of everyday life. In connection with the additional often unlawful assembly law requirements of the assembly authorities, there has recently been a significant need for legal work and advice. We have been successfully advising and representing those affected in court for years.

Useful links in the area of administrative law

Special pages in administrative law

Recent decisions in administrative law

14.12.2023Göttingen Administrative Court - Judgment of November 30, 2023 - Ref.: 4 A 212/20
Standards: Section 28 Paragraph 1 Sentence 1, Section 30 Paragraph 1 Sentence 2 and Paragraph 2 IfSG - Keywords: Corona measure, fencing, city of Göttingen, Groner Landstrasse, Göttingen Administrative Court
8.11.2023Halle Administrative Court - Decision of October 13, 2023 - 5 B 446/23 HAL
Norms: Section 80 Paragraph 5 VwGO, Section 42b Paragraph 7 Sentence 2 SGB VIII - Keywords: Distribution procedure for unaccompanied minor refugees, child welfare, expedited proceedings, Halle Administrative Court
13.10.2023Halle Administrative Court - Decision of October 2nd, 2023 - Ref.: 5 B 450/23 HAL
Standards: Section 166 VwGO i. V. m. §§ 114 ff. ZPO, § 80 para. 5 VwGO, § 42b para. 7 sentence 2 SGB VIII - Keywords: legal aid, distribution procedure for unaccompanied minor refugees, child welfare, urgent proceedings, Halle Administrative Court
4.12.2022Eschwege District Court - Judgment of October 25, 2022 - Ref.: 71 Cs - 1622 Js 23138/21
Norms: § 240 StGB, § 53 StGB - Keywords: coercion, attempted deportation, Witzenhausen, Eschwege district court

New mandate acceptance form
We have simplified the mandate intake structure and have set up a form for this on our homepage: https://anwaltskanzlei-adam.de/mandatsaufnahme-formular/ In the future, please use this form to transmit client data and no longer use the PDF Recording sheet.
Due to illness, no admissions office on November 28, 2023
Due to illness, the secretariat is closed today, November 28th, 2023. If necessary, please leave a message on the answering machine or write an email to kontakt@anwaltskanzlei-adam.de.
APPEAL: Human dignity applies to everyone – including refugees! Against tightening of social law and for the abolition of the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act
Joint statement from 154 organizations For several weeks there have been persistent calls for benefits in kind and reductions in benefits for refugees. In many cases, those affected already only receive the reduced benefits under the Asylum Seekers Benefits Act. In the debate, groups are pitted against each other and human dignity is openly questioned. We reject any tightening of social law and demand: The Asylum Seekers Benefits Act must be abolished and those affected must be included in the regular social benefit system. We are following with dismay the current political debate about asylum seekers, which is increasingly dominated by irrelevant and inhumane demands. The discussions about social benefits are a good example of this. As long as refugees are in need, they are entitled to the subsistence minimum defined by social law. Now the aim is obviously to restrict this basic right of asylum seekers, on the grounds that this could reduce the number of refugees in Germany. The demands in question range from a general switch from cash to benefits in kind, to discriminatory payment cards and a reduction in the subsistence minimum, to the demand that basic medical care be withheld from sick people. This debate suggests that refugees are the central cause of the undoubtedly existing social ills such as a lack of living space or a lack of school and daycare places. However, these have other causes and would also exist if Germany did not accept any asylum seekers. Refugees thus become scapegoats for the failed social policies of recent years, without actually solving the existing problems. But anyone who presents pseudo-solutions loses trust in political ability to act. In a groundbreaking decision in 2012, the Constitutional Court upheld the right of every person to a humane minimum subsistence level and ensured that benefits under the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act were at least temporarily close to the Hartz IV level (today "citizen's benefit"). At the same time, the highest German court clearly rejected the idea of using social benefits to deter asylum seekers: “The human dignity guaranteed in Article 1 Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law cannot be relativized in terms of migration policy.” (Decision of July 18, 2012 - 1 BvL 10/10 ) In other words: Social benefits must not be cut in order to deter people from fleeing to Germany. Around ten years later, in 2022, the Federal Constitutional Court condemned a ten percent cut in basic services for single refugees who have to live in “shared accommodation” as unconstitutional. Furthermore, the claim that better social conditions would lead to more people seeking protection has long been scientifically refuted. Refugees are already receiving drastically reduced amounts of money, especially in the initial reception centers, in addition to a place in a shared room, canteen food and hygiene packages and often disastrously delayed health care. No one who flees a war or political persecution gives up on fleeing because he or she will soon have to live in Germany with even more benefits in kind. If in 2023 the Federal Office determines protection status in over 70 percent of all asylum applications that were decided on the content by September, it will become all too clear that people are not coming because of social benefits, but are looking for protection here. The claim that relevant amounts of money from the low benefits received by asylum seekers are transferred to countries of origin or subsequently handed over to smugglers is cynical and unrealistic. Human dignity and the welfare state principle guarantee a humane minimum subsistence level – for all people. We say: Anyone who plays different groups off against each other and openly questions human dignity, Article 1 of our constitution, is turning against the central achievements of our democracy and the welfare state. And anyone who ignores the fundamental right to a minimum subsistence level that has been confirmed by the Federal Constitutional Court undermines the rule of law. We are therefore renewing the appeal, for which more than 200 organizations have already come together this year: There cannot be double standards for human dignity. We demand the same right to social benefits for all people living in Germany, without discriminatory differences. The Asylum Seekers Benefits Act must be abolished. Those affected must be included in the regular social benefits system. Further information here: https://www.proasyl.de/news/30-jahre-asylwerbungleistungsgesetz-30-jahre-diskriminierung-von-amts-wegen/
“Remembering means fighting!” Between recognition and forgetting. Fatalities from right-wing violence in Lower Saxony since 1990.
“Remembering means fighting!” Between recognition and forgetting – yesterday the exhibition “Remembering means fighting!” Between recognition and forgetting. opened in the Hanover Pavilion cultural center and can be viewed from March 2nd. – 10.03. can be viewed there

PM: Federal Court of Justice overturns the scandalous ruling of the Mühlhausen regional court in the so-called Fretterode proceedings - the case is referred back to another chamber of the regional court and reopened
Göttingen/Karlsruhe, March 13, 2024 In the so-called Fretterode proceedings, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) in Karlsruhe, after an appeal hearing today (ref.: 2 StR 237/23), has rejected the scandalous judgment of the Mühlhausen Regional Court of September 15, 2022 (ref. : 3 KLs 101 Js 47753/18 jug) repealed due to significant deficiencies in the assessment of evidence. The proceedings will now be referred back to another chamber of the Mühlhausen Regional Court and the proceedings will be reopened. With a clearly lenient verdict, the regional court sentenced the two neo-Nazis Gianluca B. and Nordulf H. to a prison sentence of just one year, suspended on probation, or to a work requirement of 200 hours of work under juvenile criminal law for dangerous bodily harm. The co-prosecution had called for a conviction, particularly for aggravated robbery, with significantly higher penalties and, in particular, for neo-Nazi motives to be taken into account when determining the sentence. The district court refused to convict the defendant for aggravated robbery because it questioned the statements of the co-plaintiffs regarding the theft of a SLR camera and instead gave more credence to the neo-Nazis, who denied the robbery and large parts of the crime as a whole. The regional court also did not want to recognize that the perpetrators had neo-Nazi motives. In response to the appeal by the co-plaintiff and the public prosecutor's office, the BGH has now declared the Mühlhausen regional court's assessment of the evidence to be incorrect. There is a lack of an overall assessment of all the evidence regarding the theft of the camera - including the motive for the crime. In addition, the whereabouts of the camera were not discussed in the assessment of evidence. The proceedings were referred back to another chamber of the Mühlhausen Regional Court, which must take evidence again. As soon as the written reasons for the judgment are available, more specific information can be provided about the course of the proceedings and the reasons for the annulment by the BGH. If you have any questions, the lawyers Sven Adam and Rasmus Kahlen are available using the contact details provided. The BGH press release can be found here: https://www.bundesgerichtshof.de/SharedDocs/Press Releases/DE/2024/2024061.html?nn=10690868 Background: Two journalists from Göttingen were in Fretterode at the end of April 2018 for research reasons were discovered by people on the extreme right spectrum. As they tried to retreat in their car, they were followed by two people in a black BMW. There was a chase on the country road and through the towns of Fretterode and Germershausen. At the entrance to Hohengandern, the journalists were caught by their pursuers. After the journalists' vehicle came to a stop in a ditch, the two people from the right-wing spectrum first attacked the car and then the occupants with a baseball bat, a knife, a 40-50 cm wrench and pepper spray. The photographer suffered, among other things, a stab wound in the thigh with a knife, his companion was hit on the head with a heavy wrench, and he suffered a fracture of the frontal skull bone and a head laceration. The vehicle's windows were destroyed, the rear tires were slashed and the photographer's camera and camera bag were stolen. The perpetrators then retreated in the black BMW. At the request of the seriously injured victim, residents were able to notify the emergency services and the police. The photographer was able to take photos of one of the perpetrators from his own vehicle. The SD card with these photos did not come into the possession of the neo-Nazis and was made available to the investigating authorities.
PM: Trial begins after racist attack on August 14th, 2022 in Eschwege not far from the Open Flair Festival - taking evidence seriously incriminates two defendants
Press release on the start of the trial after a racist attack on August 14th, 2022 in Eschwege, not far from the Open Flair Festival
PM: Legal organizations strongly condemn right-wing extremist “master plan”.
Press release from the RAV and other legal organizations on the right-wing extremist “master plan”
PM: 223 people from 78 families are suing for compensation totaling €880,850.00 after the unlawful deprivation of their liberty by fencing around the building complex at Groner Landstrasse 9-9b in Göttingen
After the much-noticed decision of the Göttingen Administrative Court (VG) of November 30, 2023 (Az.: 4 A 212/20) on the illegality of the fencing and police guarding of the Göttingen building complex at Groner Landstrasse 9-9b during the Corona pandemic in June 2020 Affected families are now suing the city of Göttingen for compensation for pain and suffering. Compensation for pain and suffering totaling €880,850.00 is being claimed before the Göttingen Regional Court for 223 people - 96 of them children - from 78 families. In accordance with the case law of the Federal Constitutional Court (case number: 1 BvR 1717/15) on unlawful deprivation of liberty, the individual claims are at least €50.00 per person per hour of deprivation of liberty. In December 2023, the city of Göttingen was initially asked out of court to make the payments or to waive the defense of statute of limitations and to enter into out-of-court settlement negotiations. The city of Göttingen did not respond to this, so the lawsuits had to be filed by December 31, 2023 due to the impending statute of limitations. At the time, the city of Göttingen placed the residents of the residential complex under general suspicion and lowered the public reputation of those affected. In the decision of November 30, 2023, the Göttingen Administrative Court therefore assumed not only a violation of the fundamental right to freedom of the person guaranteed by Article 2 Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 in conjunction with Article 104 Paragraph 1 GG, but also a violation of the right to freedom Development of personality (Art. 2 Para. 1 GG). “Because of the obviously unlawful deprivation of liberty and the profound violation of personal rights, the affected families are entitled to compensation against the city of Göttingen under the so-called official liability claim (§ 839 BGB). The city obviously calculated that the claims would expire. The fact that the claims of the already marginalized people have not already been satisfied out of court and that the families are being forced into the lawsuits is once again a financial policy maneuver on the backs of the people in Groner Landstrasse 9-9b," says lawyer Sven Adam, who is responsible for the lawsuits Families have raised questions about the out-of-court behavior of the city administration. “We will now use comprehensive applications for evidence in the proceedings to examine the city administration's wrong decisions and make the sometimes life-threatening conditions within the complex during the enclosure the subject of evidence,” Adam concludes for the time being. If you have any questions, Attorney Sven Adam is available using the contact details provided.

Stuttgart Social Court - Decision of April 17, 2024 - Ref.: S 11 AY 107/23 ER
Norms: § 3 AsylbLG, § 3a AsylbLG, § 86b Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 SGG - Keywords: standard needs level 1, standard needs level 2, benefits according to §§ 3, 3a AsylbLG, costs after settlement through departure, Stuttgart Social Court
Stuttgart Social Court - Decision of April 18, 2024 - Ref.: S 9 AY 792/24 ER
Norms: § 3 AsylbLG, § 3a AsylbLG, § 86b Para. 2 Sentence 2 SGG - Keywords: standard needs level 1, standard needs level 2, benefits according to §§ 3, 3a AsylbLG, Stuttgart Social Court
Speyer Social Court - Decision of April 11, 2024 - Ref.: S 15 AY 3/24 ER
Norms: § 3 AsylbLG, § 3a AsylbLG, § 86b Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 SGG - Keywords: standard needs level 1, standard needs level 2, benefits according to §§ 3, 3a AsylbLG, Speyer Social Court
Trier Social Court - Decision of April 15, 2024 - Ref.: S 3 AY 7/24 ER
Norms: § 3 AsylbLG, § 3a AsylbLG, § 86b Para. 2 Sentence 2 SGG - Keywords: standard needs level 1, standard needs level 2, benefits according to §§ 3, 3a AsylbLG, Trier Social Court