Huh? OLG Stuttgart. Para 123 of the decision:
You said it was a decision by the German Court of Appeals. There is no German Court of Appeals. I went through all this in my post 41 but you ignored it.
I looked up this particular case. A Dr. Stefan Lanka issued a challenge asking for scientific proof of the existence of a measles virus. His challenge stated that the prize money would only be paid “when a scientific publication is presented in which the existence of the measles virus is not only asserted, but also proven and, among other things, its size is determined”. This is a summary; the actual requirements were very detailed.
Dr David Bardens submitted six different papers and claimed to have won the award that was offered, €100,000. The problem was that none of his papers met all of Lanka’s requirements. The Oberlandesgericht held that the promoter of the award, Lanka, could determine the rules and decide if his criteria had been met. The judges said their decision
was strictly a legal judgement and did not make any statement on the existence or nonexistence of the measles virus.
The decision was appealed to the Bundesgerichtshof, which dismissed the appeal.
Some right-wing nut job websites have claimed that the German Court of Appeals (you know, the court that does not exist) ruled that there is no measles virus. As I have shown, that was not what the court decided. The court examined the legal issues only, not the scient
As a result, the appeal, in so far as it is permissible, is in any case successful because the plaintiff did not meet the criterion of claiming to prove the existence of the measles virus through "a scientific publication". As a result, the plaintiff is not entitled to any pre-judicial attorney's fees.
I posted this before but since you apparently never read it I will post it again. I looked up this particular case. A Dr. Stefan Lanka issued a challenge asking for scientific proof of the existence of a measles virus. His challenge stated that the prize money would only be paid “when a scientific publication is presented in which the existence of the measles virus is not only asserted, but also proven and, among other things, its size is determined”. This is a summary; the actual requirements were very detailed.
Dr David Bardens submitted six different papers and claimed to have won the award that was offered, €100,000. The problem was that none of his papers met all of Lanka’s requirements. The Oberlandesgericht held that the promoter of the award, Lanka, could determine the rules and decide if his criteria had been met. The judges said their decision
was strictly a legal judgement and did not make any statement on the existence or nonexistence of the measles virus.
The decision was appealed to the Bundesgerichtshof, which dismissed the appeal.
Why bother. You either get it or you're doomed.
Or you wear a mask wash your hands and practice social distancing.