DE | Kammergericht Berlin (3. Senat für Bußgeldsachen)
Docket: 3 ORbs 164/25
122 SsRs 33/25 • appellate
2025-08-25
kammergericht berlin (3. senat für bußgeldsachen) — beschluss vom 25. august 2025 — 3 orbs 164/25
Unknown / Not Disclosed (automation mentioned, no AI tool identified) automated template filingsirrelevant boilerplatefalse factual assertions
I. Executive Summary
In a regulatory-offence appeal context, the court criticised defence submissions as a meaninglessly automated form of litigation using irrelevant boilerplate and invented factual assertions.
The court warned that such automated process conduct could lead to denial of relief even if a procedural error were later identified.
It also noted concerns about untrue assertions in the appellate brief.
The application to admit the legal complaint was dismissed and costs were imposed on the appellant.
II. Conduct Analysis
The defence used an automated approach to generating filings (template text blocks unrelated to the actual accusation), including invented assertions about the proceedings.
The court treated this as dysfunctional and warned about consequences for the success of the remedy.
III. Legal Foundations
Section 80(2), OWiG
Section 79(3), OWiG
Section 344(2) sentence 2, StPO
Section 43a(3) sentence 2, BRAO
IV. Key Facts
1) The court stated that much of the appellate submission made no sense and appeared to be produced through an automated process using text blocks designed for different types of offences.
2) The court noted the submission included untrue assertions about the procedural history.
3) The court dismissed the application to admit the legal complaint and imposed costs on the appellant.
V. Consequences & Sanction
1) Application to admit the legal complaint dismissed.
2) Appellant ordered to bear the costs of the (deemed withdrawn) legal complaint.