Suche
Mein Konto
Oldenburg farmer: 600,000 euros repayment after arson case!
Oldenburg Higher Regional Court sentences farmer to repay 600,000 euros for insurance abuse.
Oldenburg farmer: 600,000 euros repayment after arson case!
On June 18, 2025, the Oldenburg Higher Regional Court decided that a farmer would be ordered to repay 600,000 euros and interest to his insurance company. This decision follows a lengthy legal battle that dates back to the mid-1990s, when repeated fires broke out on the farmer's farm. NDR reports that technical defects were initially suspected as the cause of the fire, but the intensive investigation ultimately led to suspicions of fraud and arson.
In 2009 there was a serious fire in a calf fattening stable, which was proven to have been a commissioned arson. The insurance subsequently paid 600,000 euros for the damage caused. Until 2010, the costs of technical defects and arson were covered. But years later, after a comprehensive assessment of the evidence, the Higher Regional Court found that the farmer was responsible for insurance abuse according to Section 265 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code. Loud LTO He was classified as an indirect perpetrator or accomplice because he had commissioned a third party to set the fire and prepared the crime.
Acquittal and new judicial review
It is interesting that the previous trial before the Oldenburg regional court ended with an acquittal. This was due to insufficient evidence to support a criminal conviction. However, the civil court is not bound by the criminal court's rulings, which enables the expansive assessment of evidence that ultimately led to the higher regional court's decision.
The claim back of the 600,000 euros by the insurance company was justified after the farmer had made a miscalculation by claiming insurance benefits over the years that were based on fraudulent actions. The civil chamber of the Oldenburg Regional Court was unable to establish sufficient certainty that the defendant was the perpetrator, but the evidence from the Higher Regional Court weighed more heavily.
This ruling not only has legal consequences for the affected farmer, but could also have far-reaching consequences for future proceedings in similar cases. Clarity about policyholder responsibilities in the context of arson may be redefined.