Administrative law at a snail's pace: Leipzig Administrative Court slows down in inaction lawsuits

A month's salary slips away, a career opportunity disappears, or the long-awaited passport remains a distant prospect because the file gathers dust on a government desk. When the immigration office or naturalization authority fails to respond for months, many affected individuals resort to the most powerful weapon of administrative law: the action for failure to act pursuant to Section 75 of the German Administrative Court Procedure Act (VwGO). However, those who believe that taking their case to the Leipzig Administrative Court will immediately bring momentum to the matter are often bitterly disappointed. In practice, we repeatedly witness proceedings at the administrative courts in eastern Germany stalling and applications becoming bogged down in bureaucratic and judicial inertia.

Why do inaction lawsuits at the Administrative Court in Leipzig and in East Germany take so long?

The fundamental problem lies not only with the immigration authorities themselves, but affects the entire judicial system. Both authorities and administrative courts – such as the Leipzig Administrative Court or the Frankfurt (Oder) Administrative Court – are struggling with severe staff shortages. The region suffers from a structural lack of qualified young lawyers, resulting in positions remaining vacant for extended periods. At the same time, the number of cases in migration and citizenship law is exploding.

When we file an action for failure to act under Section 75 of the German Administrative Court Procedure Act (VwGO), the statutory three-month deadline has formally expired. However, the court frequently makes use of the option provided by law to suspend the proceedings and grant the authority an extension if it presents a "sufficient reason" for the delay. Extreme overload is then effectively considered a justifiable reason – to the detriment of the applicants. The court then merely sends status inquiries to the authority, grants response periods of several weeks, and allows valuable time to slip away.

When will an action for failure to act, with the help of a lawyer, actually bring about a breakthrough?

A lawsuit is not a guaranteed success. Whether a case before the Leipzig Administrative Court is quickly successful or gets lost in the shuffle depends largely on the legal strategy and persistence. If a lawsuit is filed without thorough preparation or sustained pressure, it simply joins the thousands of pending cases.

In our daily legal practice, we observe that courts rarely respond to standard pleadings anymore. A measurable acceleration of proceedings usually only occurs when the case is thoroughly prepared from the outset, all legal requirements under the Residence Act (AufenthG) or the Nationality Act (StAG) are demonstrably met, and the authorities are given no room for evasion. A lawsuit accelerates the proceedings precisely when it exerts such high pressure on the authorities that concessions prior to an oral hearing become the most economical and time-saving course of action for them.

What unwritten ways are there to get the Leipzig Administrative Court to process the case?

Those who rely solely on formal correspondence lose valuable months. In our practice, the scope of our representation extends far beyond simply sending legal documents. To break the deadlock in a court proceeding at the Leipzig Administrative Court, direct, personal, and assertive contact is sometimes necessary.

It is part of our firm's strategy to contact the presiding judges or reporting judges by telephone and emphatically convey the client's legitimate urgency. A personal conversation with the panel often provides more clarity about the actual status of the case than three formal status inquiries. When the court is made aware that the case file number represents a matter of existential hardship or imminent harm, the case is distinguished from the anonymous mass of others. This very persistence is what differentiates passive litigation from active advocacy.

Conclusion: Don't wait, but implement strategically.

The Leipzig Administrative Court and many other East German courts are heavily burdened, which is why an action for failure to act can easily get lost in the bureaucratic maze without specialized expertise. Anyone who wants to successfully compel inactive authorities to make a decision needs not only knowledge of the relevant legal provisions, but also a clear strategy, perseverance, and the courage to make direct contact with the decision-makers. We will guide you through the entire process and ensure, with the necessary determination, that your rights are not overlooked.