Legal topics
Proceedings regarding additional financing contributions for Stuttgart 21
DB Group has filed a lawsuit against the project partners in the Stuttgart 21 project for further financing contributions on the basis of the so-called negotiation clause with the Stuttgart Administrative Court in order to avoid risks under the statute of limitations. The court dismissed the lawsuit on May 7, 2024. DB Group does not consider the reasons for the ruling to be tenable and, therefore, applied for leave to appeal on October 25, 2024. The court rejected the application for leave to appeal by order dated August 1, 2025. The decision is incontestable. DB Group has decided to waive further legal remedies.
Civil proceedings on infrastructure utilization fees
Disputes regarding station usage fees are still pending before the civil courts. The question here is whether and according to which standards the civil courts may subject the regulated fees to a further civil court assessment at all.
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in 2017 that a review of the equity of infrastructure charges by civil courts in accordance with Section 315 German Civil Code (BGB) is incompatible with European railway law. On October 27, 2022, the ECJ ruled in a preliminary ruling procedure that the antitrust law applicable to rail infrastructure charges by the civil courts was affirmed in principle, but this was linked to the condition that the regulatory authority will be consulted first, and the civil courts must follow their ruling (ECJ, C-721 / 20 – DB Station & Service). In its ruling of March 7, 2024 (ECJ, C-582 / 22 – Die Länderbahn), the ECJ confirmed the possibility of this retrospective review of old fees. In the meantime, the Federal Network Agency (Bundesnetzagentur; BNetzA) has initiated proceedings to review the former fees in dispute. The authority concluded one proceeding regarding station usage fees with a decision dated November 14, 2024, and largely confirmed the fees in question in accordance with the 2005 station pricing system. The progress of further proceedings is still open. In the meantime, a number of pending civil proceedings regarding infrastructure utilization fees have been settled.
State aid proceedings concerning DB Cargo
In accordance with the European Commission’s decision of November 29, 2024, concluding the proceedings, DB Cargo AG must implement the conditions specified therein by December 31, 2026. The European Commission had made the restructuring aid in favor of DB Cargo AG dependent on the implementation of the ongoing transformation plan, and the implementation of the competition measures promised by the Federal Republic of Germany. The Federal Government regularly informs the European Commission about the implementation of the requirements. If the restructuring plan is not successfully implemented by the deadline or if the measures and obligations imposed by the European Commission have not been implemented individually or as a whole, the European Commission may impose further conditions or order the repayment of the aid. This results in a going concern risk for DB Cargo AG.
Proceedings regarding excessive train-path usage fees at DB Cargo Polska
In 2025, DB Cargo Polska initiated legal proceedings before the District Court in Warsaw to obtain a refund of the overpaid train-path usage fees for the 2014 / 2015, 2015 / 2016 and 2016 / 2017 schedules. The lawsuit was filed after the national courts found irregularities in the calculation of train-path usage fees as part of their review of the regulatory authority’s fee approval decisions.
The proceedings are still pending in the court of first instance.
Antitrust topics
In 2025, the Group companies were involved in a total of six legal proceedings relating to alleged violations of antitrust law. This mainly concerns:
- Administrative proceedings conducted by the German Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt; BKartA) since 2019, in which the BKartA issued a prohibition order against DB AG on June 26, 2023. This involves new legal issues relating to online sales, for which there is currently a lack of established jurisdiction and administrative practice. The order obliged DB AG to make changes to its sales system at short notice. A fine has not been imposed. DB AG considers the decision unlawful and has filed an appeal against it. From DB AG’s point of view, the reasons for the unlawfulness include an incomplete and incorrect determination of the facts, an incorrect market definition and theory of damages based on this, an incorrect weighing of interests, the disproportionality of the legal consequences ordered and violation of the right to be heard.
- Another case concerns alleged claims for damages by a provider of regional rail transport services against Group companies following a commitment decision by the BKartA against DB AG in 2016. The action was dismissed and the appeal against it was rejected. On appeal by the plaintiffs, the Federal Court of Justice referred the case back to the responsible Higher Regional Court in 2023.
- In addition, DB Group is involved in various legal proceedings relating to the pursuit of compensation for damages against cartel participants.
- DB Competition Claims GmbH is pursuing, among others, the combined claims of DB Group and claims of the German Armed Forces and more than 40 non-Group companies in proceedings before the Munich Regional Court against truck manufacturers involved in the truck cartel, who, in violation of competition law, agreed on gross list prices for medium and heavy trucks, the passing of costs for the introduction of emissions reduction technologies to customers and the schedule for the introduction of such technologies in the period from 1997 to 2011. So far, an out-of-court settlement has been reached with two truck manufacturers regarding compensation payments for damages.
- The claim for compensation for damages brought by DB Netz AG (now: DB InfraGO AG) and other Group companies against rail suppliers involved in the so-called rail cartel, among others Moravia Steel, is currently being appealed to the Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt after the action was dismissed in the first instance.