Maximilian Reichl joined Oppenhoff in 2021. He studied law at the University of Passau and completed his legal training at the Higher Regional Court of Munich. Before joining Oppenhoff, he worked as a lawyer in the dispute resolution practice group of a US law firm in Frankfurt am Main.
Experience
Maximilian Reichl advises and represents clients in and out of court in commercial disputes.
A particular focus of his work is on domestic court proceedings following international arbitration proceedings, such as the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, annulment proceedings, and the defence against such measures.
As part of Oppenhoff's Latin America Desk, Maximilian Reichl is fluent in Spanish and regularly advises clients from Latin American countries on questions of German law. He also assists European companies in disputes involving Latin American jurisdictions.
Maximilian Reichl also advises on the defence and enforcement of claims for damages of all kinds, in particular on company and consultant liability. He regularly represents his clients in national and international arbitration proceedings, for example under the DIS or ICC arbitration rules.
As a member of Oppenhoff's automotive sector group, he also advises clients on the negotiation of supply contracts in the automotive industry.
Maximilian Reichl serves as a lecturer on professional liability for the Frankfurt Bar and as an examiner for the State Examination.
Education
Maximilian Reichl
PartnerRechtsanwalt
Languages
German, English, Spanish
OpernTurm
Bockenheimer Landstraße 2-4
60306 Frankfurt am Main
T +49 69 707968 134
M +49 151 2300 7913
Articles and Essays
Verschoben, verändert, vergessen – Augen auf im elektronischen Fristenwesen [Postponed, changed, forgotten – keep an eye on electronic deadline management]
RDi 2026, 428
Videoverhandlung zwischen Grundrechtsanspruch und Verfahrensführung: aller guten Befangenheitsanträge sind zwei?
RDi 2026, 332-336
Einreichung eines Schriftsatzes per EGVP mit einbettender Signatur bei Geeignetheit des übermittelten Dokuments für die Bearbeitung durch das Gericht [Submission of a Pleading via EGVP with Embedded Signature if the Transmitted Document is Suitable for Court Processing]
ZIP – Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht dated 7 February 2025, Issue 06, p. 304
Organisationsverschulden in der Kanzlei 2.0: (Un-)verzeihliche digitale Fehltritte bei der Softwarepflege [Organisational negligence in law firm 2.0: (Un)forgivable digital faux pas in software maintenance]
RDi 2024, 243
Zur Erstattungsfähigkeit der durch die Mandatierung eines zweiten Rechtsanwalts entstandenen Mehrkosten [Reimbursability of additional costs incurred through retention of a second lawyer]
EWiR 2023, 703-704
Wenn zwei sich streiten, freut sich der Drittstaat [When two quarrel, the third country rejoices]
Deutscher Anwaltspiegel dated 29 April 2020 (in collaboration with Dr. Michael Weigel)
Zurück in die Zukunft – Analogisierung des elektronischen Fristenkalenders [Back to the future – converting the electronic deadline calendar into analogue form]
Deutscher Anwaltspiegel dated 07 October 2019 (in collaboration with Dr. Michael Weigel)
Schlussakkord im Grauzementkartell – Antworten des BGH auf kartellrechtliche Grundsatzfragen [Final chord in the grey cement cartel: Federal Supreme Court’s answers to fundamental issues of antitrust law]
Europäische Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsrecht 2018, Issue 19 , pp. 804-811
Litigation & Arbitration24.04.2026 Newsletter
BMJV presents draft bill: Modernisation of arbitration law
On 27 January 2026, the BMJV presented a new draft bill on the modernisation of arbitration law. It builds on reform initiatives from the time of the traffic-light coalition, but also introduces new ideas. In particular, it provides for technology-neutral procedural requirements and a strengthening of the English language as the language of proceedings.
Litigation & Arbitration04.11.2024 Newsletter
The reform of the KapMuG: phoenix from the ashes?
The Second Act to Reform the Capital Markets Model Case Act (Kapitalanleger-Musterverfahrensgesetz - KapMuG) came into force on 20 July 2024. The aim of the reform was to streamline and modernise this particular form of model case proceedings, which is intended to make it easier for aggrieved investors to assert their claims against supposedly unassailable opponents on an equal footing.
Litigation & Arbitration24.09.2024 Newsletter
Managing litigation risks: Assignment models and litigation funding make it possible
Enforcing damage claims in court is often associated with a high financial risk and organisational effort, even for institutional investors and companies, which is why injured parties often refrain from doing so. In such cases, assignment models and litigation funding can be the solution: injured parties can enforce their claims cost-effectively in court - sometimes even without being a party to the proceedings themselves.