In the case of the internal compliance proceedings against the former Bild editor-in-chief Julian Reichelt, who is accused of abuse of power and mixing of professional and private interests, Springer is said to have sent threatening letters to the lawyer Christian Schertz, one of the women concerned, according to information from the magazine Der Spiegel represents. Accordingly, the Springer chief legal counsel Konrad Wartenberg sent threatening letters to the lawyer shortly before the appearance of a report in the New York Times and the planned publication of Ippen-Investigativ. The accusation: Schertz or his client had pierced a written record of their testimony to the compliance committee to the media. This is to be withdrawn immediately for the purpose of "damage limitation".Schertz had rejected the accusation against Springer and asked the publisher to withdraw the allegation, otherwise he would take “legal steps” against it.
Axel Weidemann
Editor in the features section.
Follow I follow
Meanwhile, another law firm, KNPZ from Hamburg, on behalf of the Springer Group, announced to Schertz that it might be a "violation of the Trade Secrets Act", which could have criminal consequences. Schertz, in turn, replied that piercing the said minutes of the interview would be downright "absurd". He also confirmed this to the FAZ on Friday. According to this, it had not even been released for the compliance procedure for “personal rights reasons”. To the best of his knowledge, the said protocol was held by him and Freshfields. He does not know whether representatives of Springer Verlag or third parties know it. He couldn't explain how it found its way to the New York Times or the investigative team at Ippen Verlag, who first researched the matter.He described the threat against him and his client as a "farce". The New York Times and Ippen-Investigativ had already stated that the document had been leaked to them by third parties. He could also have no interest in a publication simply because all women affected in this compliance procedure would make themselves vulnerable to Springer through such an action. Should Springer continue to maintain his submission, he would reserve the right to cease and desist and revoke proceedings for himself and his client, Schertz told the FAZ.because all women affected in this compliance procedure would make themselves vulnerable to Springer through such an action. Should Springer continue to maintain his submission, he would reserve the right to cease and desist and revoke proceedings for himself and his client, Schertz told the FAZ.because all women affected in this compliance procedure would make themselves vulnerable to Springer through such an action. Should Springer continue to maintain his submission, he would reserve the right to cease and desist and revoke proceedings for himself and his client, Schertz told the FAZ.
Springer confirmed to the FAZ on Friday that he had contacted Schertz. Due to the media inquiries, it was "obvious" that "the minutes of the questioning of a client represented by Prof. Schertz were available to these media, although all the minutes - at the request of the people interviewed - were subject to confidentiality protection". He was therefore informed "that all other parties involved in the compliance procedure had maintained the agreed (and explicitly requested by his client at the time) confidentiality".
In response to the question (which Spiegel had originally directed to Springer) how the legal proceedings against Schertz and his client fit in with the statement by a Springer spokeswoman quoted in the NYT, according to which nobody can be touched in this matter who has complaints According to the statement: “The integrity of the compliance process and the rights of all persons involved must be protected”.