Dental laboratory services and the dental practice after a recent decision of the BGH (AZ: I ZR 231/10) it represents an inappropriate ursachliche influence on the dental diagnostic and therapeutic freedom if dentists contractually agree, can participate in a dental laboratory operated by a limited liability company with all incurred in treating their patients dental laboratory services to hire and dentists with a corporate structure on winning this GmbH. In the case the applicant concluded an operator of a dental laboratory, in 2001 a cooperation agreement with the defendant, which were established a community of practice dentists. Then this among other things undertook to instruct the laboratory for all covered dental services. But, services, where patients actively given the selection of laboratories (section 2.1.) were excluded. Previously, the applicant was founded in the same year by the present Managing Director, a dental technician master and a limited liability company.

In addition existed between the applicant and the above mentioned GmbH contracts on the establishment of a peaceful society, where the GmbH including profit rights approved to. Sole shareholder of GmbH was an AG, which was founded by the dentists in the life. End of 2005 announced the dentists the cooperation and began to operate their own laboratory. The applicant still demanded the fulfillment of the contract because it only properly could be terminated in 2011. The defendants countered, however, the agreement was null and void because it violated medical professional law taking into account the corporate agreements. You could not ask the defendant, to continue a first real of them anti-competitive behaviour. Therefore, you could cancel extremely at this time. The judge rejected the lawsuit and gave the defendants right.

They found were that the dentists by the clause in the agreement (section 2.1.) against violate dental professional right. Specifically they saw the so-called prohibition of assignment here injured, according to which it is especially not allowed dentists to demand a fee for the assignment and referral of patients or promise other benefits or grant to even promise or grant. Purpose the prohibition of this assignment is namely to prevent an unobjective influence on the dental treatment services, to prevent decisions against the interest of the patient. The dentists such restricted were cooperation in their dental freedom, that your decision to entrust only the tied dental laboratory, dental orders was no longer exclusively the interests of patients. This is also not relevant that no direct consideration was provided by pages of the dental laboratory in prospect in the cooperation agreement. Because due to the profit rights the option to influence the society existed for the dentists at any time. At the same time, the judges saw a violation of the applicant against the UWG until July 2004 applicable 1. This provision also prohibits dentists to align their decisions not only on the well-being of the patient, but to an own interest in obtaining a return. That according to the cooperation agreement, patients themselves have the opportunity to choose their dental laboratory, nothing in the outcome changed. Because just such patients who expressed no particular idea with respect to the selection of the laboratories, rely on the medical independence. Since both parties have violated a legal prohibition, therefore the underlying legal transaction, so the cooperation agreement, to be regarded as null and void, so the judge was. Other non-binding and free information around the right of professionals, see