Judgment: BGH makes legal protection insurance companies liable

Lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers BGH makes legal protection insurance companies liable As of: November 11, 2026 • 7:46 p.m

Lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers have not been uncommon since the corona pandemic. Insurance companies often do not want to support this - because of the supposedly low chances of success. The BGH has now ruled that this is often wrong.

In 2021, Frank Flatten will be vaccinated against Covid three times. When he broke both feet the following year, the injuries did not heal properly. "Then my feet exploded. They were twice as big, I was at home for months and had a lot of treatments," says Flatten. He developed problems standing and walking.

He and his doctors asked themselves what could be the cause of his symptoms. “Many doctors have speculated and one suspicion is that the vaccination could have something to do with it,” said Flatten. That's why he wants to sue the vaccine manufacturer Biontech/Pfizer for damages. His legal protection insurance should cover the costs of the procedure.

What options do consumers have if the insurance company does not pay out in the event of damage? more

The insurance company refused, arguing that Flatten had no chance of suing for damages. That's why he first has to sue the legal protection insurance company so that he can get the approval to be able to carry out the other proceedings, explains Flatten.

The crux of the matter now is: According to the contractual conditions that Flatten signed, the insurance company can refuse legal protection in certain cases - namely whenever a lawsuit does not have a sufficient chance of success from its point of view.

The insurance company argued that this was also the case in the case of Frank Flatten. There had already been many similar lawsuits in Germany, most of which were unsuccessful. For example, the courts had argued that the benefits of the Covid-19 vaccine were significantly higher compared to the risks. Therefore, legal protection insurance companies would not have to pay for proceedings against vaccine manufacturers in such cases.

What should you pay attention to when choosing legal protection insurance? more

But the BGH has now decided: The insurance company could not simply refuse to cover the costs by citing a lack of prospects of success. Because whether Flatten receives compensation or not depends on difficult questions that have not yet been clarified by the highest court. Therefore, they should not be answered early, but would have to be clarified in the actual trial against Biontech/Pfizer.

This could then be an extensive process for Flatten. In this procedure, the court will have to clarify many medical and pharmaceutical questions in detail and obtain expert reports, said Christoph Karczewski, presiding judge of the fourth civil senate, when the verdict was announced.

Frank Flatten was satisfied after the verdict. He believes that the ruling is a big step for many people with legal protection insurance who have the same concerns. Because it is “a signal that legal protection insurance cannot simply ward off a promise of coverage.”

This topic in the program: tagesschau.de | BGH ruling: Obligations for legal protection insurance in the event of corona vaccine damage | 11/11/2026 | 7:31 p.m