Blogmenü

Facebook's platform is completely translated into German language, not to mention the legal documents required to do business in the German-speaking world. Claiming to not understand the language is quite a surprise, considering all that, and a Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf finds Facebook's claim to be ridiculous.

Facebook Law
© nitpicker / Shutterstock.com

Temporary Injunction For Account Blocking

The decision was preceded by a dispute between a man from Düsseldorf and Facebook, reports LTO and onlinehaendler-news.de. The Irish-based company had blocked the man's user account. The reason was the posting of a text that violated the rules of the platform.

The user took legal action against the blockage and obtained a temporary injunction from the Düsseldorf Regional Court. This was sent to the company in Ireland. However, the company did not accept the injunction as no translation into English was provided. Facebook claimed it absolutely necessary as the legal department did not understand the German language.

When the user finally wanted to claim the costs incurred in the amount of €750 from the court, the application was rejected because the injunction could not be served properly.

Speech Abilities Of Entire Company Taken Into Account

The user finally filed a complaint with the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court against the rejection of the application and was proved right: Facebook should have accepted the order even without a translation. That the legal department might have had its problems with the German language is irrelevant. Said in another way, the language skills of the whole company are taken into account with this ruling, not just the language skills of Facebook's legal department. Facebook has a large number of users from Germany and accordingly designs its site completely in German. The wording of the terms of use in particular suggests a knowledge of the German language and German law.

In other words: Whoever caters to German-speaking customers must expect German language legal disputes. The user had, indeed, sent his temporary injunction accordingly. Now the costs must be decided again in the regional court.