Dr. jur. Ernst Giese

Rechtsanwalt | partner


Location

Prague

Languages

German, English, Czech, French


Practice areas


Work experience and education

2009 Opening a branch office of Giese & Partner in Bratislava, Slovakia

2000 Founding partner and managing director of the company Giese & Partner in Prague, Czech Republic

1997 Founder and managing director of Prague branch of the Frankfurt association Schürmann & Partner (predecessor of Giese & Partner)

1995 Doctoral degree from the School of Law at the Freie Universität Berlin, Germany (Dr. jur.)

Membership
  • DAV - German Bar Association (admitted since 1995)

  • ČAK - Czech Bar Association (admitted since 1997)

  • SAK - Slovak Bar Association (admitted since 2009)

  • DIS - The German Arbitration Institute (association for the promotion of national and international arbitration)

  • ICC Germany (German national committee of the International Chamber of Commerce)

  • IBA - International Bar Association

  • INSOL Europe - European organisation of professionals who specialise in insolvency, business reconstruction and recovery

  • III - International Insolvency Institute

  • UIA - Union Internationale de Avocat

  • Institut für Erbrecht - The association of inheritance law specialists

Publications and activities

Attorney May Be a Witness to a Will

Attorney May Be a Witness to a Will

A recent Czech Supreme Court ruling has provided clarity on witness eligibility in succession matters, confirming that an attorney may also act as a witness to an allographic will.

Handwritten will: New Supreme Court Decision

Handwritten will: New Supreme Court Decision

A recent Czech Supreme Court decision clarified that if the authenticity of a handwritten will is disputed, the person relying on the will must generally prove its authenticity. The ruling further strengthens the importance of proper estate planning and notarised wills.

Covid May Be Over – Its Legal Consequences Are Not

Covid May Be Over – Its Legal Consequences Are Not

The Czech Constitutional Court has confirmed that claims for damages caused by unlawful Covid‑19 measures cannot be dismissed on rigid procedural grounds alone. Even years after the pandemic, courts must assess whether affected businesses had realistic opportunities to defend their rights during the crisis.