Insolvenzverwalter Bewertungen & Top Anbieter in Berlin

Willi H auf

Google

Gerade in Rechtsfragen oder in Firmen-Rechtsvertretungen eine erste Adresse mit wirklich namhaften Referenzen. Herr Dr. Hoffmann Theinert ist unser Ansprechpartner, Wenn es um die Nachfolge beziehungsweise spezielle Firmen Transferleistungen geht. Ruhig, gelassen, intelligent und sehr eloquent hat er uns auf unseren neuen Wegen begleitet.

Former R auf

Google

🚨UPDATE 2026 MAY: In late 2025, GÖRG filed two further cross-border civil claims in Hamburg (324 O 5/26 - 324 O 6/26) on behalf of a Brandenburg public‑law corporation client. This occurred after the Berlin Regional Court (2 O 211/25) had warned GÖRG that the choice of forum constituted impermissible forum shopping, rejecting jurisdiction and invited a transfer of the case to Brandenburg so now Görg is turning back to (300Km away) Hamburg again to find Jurisdiction. The new claims seek remedies for alleged defamation arising from my characterisation of Public Servant Prof. Dr. Ulrike Tippe as "illiterate," a "far‑right extremist," and "criminal." GÖRG is assisting the plaintiffs in pursuing cross‑border litigation against me, a Chinese former contractual partner. These actions were commenced after 3 failed attempts in Hamburg to obtain an injunction. Whether this litigation strategy was competent or sane from a major German law firm is a matter of time. ____ The Berlin office of Görg in 2024 and 2025 has engaged in a series of abusive pattern litigation against me who is not even a resident of Germany, when this berlin office represented a publicly funded university that benefits from EU programs. Instead of upholding the principles of professional ethics and responsible legal practice, they pursued SLAPP-style lawsuits aimed at silencing an associate whistleblower who raised concerns about misconducts within the German university since 2016. These latest legal actions resulted in dismissal series by the very same courts from Germany. It is hard to imagine a truly responsible, ESG-compliant law firm tolerating or advising a EU/publicly funded university to pursue three cross-border lawsuits against an individual as former associate whistleblower — especially when those cases had no real prospect of success. Yet this is exactly what Görg’s Berlin office did. These actions exposed the undeniable nature of SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation): not genuine legal disputes, but intimidation campaigns designed to silence whistleblowers. Since 2024, SLAPPs are explicitly recognized as illegal under EU law. This behavior is especially troubling because their client is an EU-funded higher education institution. If such practices occurred in Hungary, the university would already risk being cut off from Erasmus, Horizon, and other EU programs under the EU’s Rule of Law conditionality mechanism. Law firms that promote ESG and diversity in public should not, in practice, undermine EU values by enabling intimidation tactics. Update: 2025 Oct 9 1980 views, thanks for your attentions 🚨Update: October 12, 2025 The abuse of process continues: Görg, on behalf of their German university client, after 3 dismissed cases in 2025, filed another legal action against me on April 03. (As resident of another EU member state I acknowledged only now..) The Görg’s client is an EU fund beneficiary education institution (which itself teaches EU laws..) is obligated to uphold democratic values, transparency and the rule of law under EU Regulation 2020/2092 for the protection of the Union budget. It is simply unimaginable that a top German law firm would assist a public, publicly funded university to engage in relentless cross-border litigation (a classic SLAPP tactic) against an ethnic non-German who has even whistleblowered multiple times against the German public institution to the EU's anti-fraud office, OLAF. This pattern confirms a disregard for the principles of fundamental rights, transparency, and the sound financial management of EU funds. This German law firm's actions are actively undermining the very EU rule of law principles they are legally and ethically bound to respect. The fact that a such a “top” german law firm would assist a german public institution to pursuit litigation against an ethnic (Chinese) ex representative - partly for protecting the german institution’s “social responsibility and anti discrimination..” - cannot describe other than a perverse inversion of basic ethics 🤦🏻‍♂️