German law · English information
Discharge is available to individuals subject to statutory conditions, including self-employed individuals in ordinary proceedings. Companies such as a GmbH do not obtain discharge under these provisions.
Usually three years from opening
The assignment period generally runs for three years from opening the proceedings. Preparation and settlement attempts are not automatically included. Repeat cases have special eligibility and timing rules; older proceedings require review of transitional law.
Duties and excluded debts
Disclosure, cooperation and employment-related duties must be fulfilled. Changes in circumstances and particular acquisitions must be reported as the relevant stage requires. Section 302 InsO excludes, among other things, fines and, subject to conditions, intentional tort claims, certain maintenance claims and debts connected with specified tax offences. Correct filing and identification of the legal basis can be decisive.
Creditor challenges
A refusal application requires a statutory ground and compliance with procedural requirements. Creditors should record specific facts and observe court directions. Dissatisfaction with the dividend alone is insufficient.
Related information
Procedures overview · Creditor rights · Corporate insolvency
Official German Insolvency Code · Official StaRUG
Practical implementation
Understand the process and continuing duties
Discharge requires an application and compliance with statutory conditions. The usual assignment period is not the same as the total preparation and procedural duration. Information, cooperation, employment-related obligations and disclosure of relevant changes may affect the result. Previous proceedings and earlier grants or refusals of discharge need separate examination. Discharge concerns qualifying pre-existing liabilities; new debts cannot simply be assumed covered because proceedings are ongoing.
Assess exceptions and creditor rights
Section 302 InsO contains specific exceptions, not a general exception for creditors dissatisfied with non-payment. Intentional-tort claims require attention to the filing basis and underlying facts. Other exceptions concern specified statutory categories. Rights against guarantors or co-debtors and the effect of security require separate review. Creditors should monitor deadlines and objections; debtors should examine special grounds rather than accept a creditor's classification without checking it.
Four practical examples
The following scenarios are illustrative examples, not reports of client matters. The outcome depends on the facts and applicable rules.
Example 1: An ordinary supply claim remains unpaid
A business wants to exclude a debt because non-payment appears unfair. Ordinary contractual non-performance is insufficient. A statutory exception must exist and, where required, be properly asserted and established.
Example 2: A guarantor also owes payment
The principal debtor receives discharge but a guarantee exists. Rights against the guarantor need separate examination. Discharge does not automatically extinguish every third-party obligation or security right.
Example 3: New debts arise during proceedings
An individual incurs new obligations after opening. They do not become covered merely because proceedings are continuing. Accrual and legal basis must be distinguished from the original insolvency claims.
Example 4: A special filing ground is disputed
A creditor alleges an intentional tort. The debtor should examine facts, notices and objection routes. A formulaic allegation does not by itself settle the legal classification.
Discuss your situation
Tell us your role, the parties involved and any deadlines. We will check conflicts, agree the scope of the work and explain the fees before accepting instructions.