Legal training has been criticised for years, and the German Jurists’ Conference (Deutscher Juristentag) put it back on the agenda in 2026. At its 75th conference in Erfurt, the section on legal training (Juristische Ausbildung) debated and voted on reform proposals. This guide shows which demands gained support, which failed and why none of this has become binding law yet.
Short answer: According to a beck-aktuell report of 18 September 2026, the German Jurists’ Conference demanded in September 2026, among other things, less examination material, more practical relevance and binding correction standards. A compulsory six-month practicum semester found no majority. Resolutions of the conference are recommendations and do not change the law. Last updated: November 2026.
The most important points at a glance
- The report by the specialist publisher beck-aktuell is dated 18 September 2026 and covers the 75th German Jurists’ Conference in Erfurt.
- Among other things, the conference adopted demands for less examination material, competence-based examinations and more practical relevance.
- Digital commentaries are to be allowed as aids in the first state examination. Written papers could voluntarily be spread over up to six months.
- Binding correction standards, such as double-blind second marking and anonymised marking, are among the demands that were adopted.
- Rejected were, among other things, transferring examination authority to universities and a compulsory six-month practicum semester.
- Resolutions of the conference have no legal force. Binding law only arises through a statute or ordinance.
Which demands did the 2026 conference adopt and which did it reject?
According to the report by the specialist publisher beck-aktuell, the resolution draws on an expert report by Prof. Dr. Julian Krüper and calls for a fundamental and prompt reform. The table sorts the individual points by topic and gives the status as the report states it.
| Topic | Content according to the report | Status according to the report |
|---|---|---|
| Examination material | Reduce material to a minimum, competence-based examinations | adopted |
| Practical relevance | Moot courts, legal advice projects, internships, more didactics | adopted |
| Repetition courses | Expansion of university repetition courses | adopted |
| Aids | Digital commentaries in the first state examination | adopted |
| Spreading papers | Voluntary spreading of written papers over up to six months in both state examinations | adopted |
| Marking | Double-blind second marking, anonymised marking, examination boards with diverse membership | adopted |
| Examination pressure | Measures against psychological pressure, comparable conditions through the states | adopted |
| Practicum semester | Compulsory six-month practicum semester | no majority |
| Examination authority | Transfer to universities | no majority |
| Curriculum split | Fixed split: 50 % compulsory subjects, 25 % each for specialisation and key qualifications | no majority |
| Clerkship | Restructuring with three compulsory placements and 15 elective months | no majority |
| Oral examination | Oral state examination without knowledge of the preliminary grades | no majority |
The table reflects the report in the legal press, which gives no voting figures. The organiser, the German Jurists’ Conference (djt.de), publishes the wording of the resolutions. The text published there is what counts before you pass a point on.
What does a resolution of the conference mean in law?
The German Jurists’ Conference is not a legislature. Its resolutions are addressed to politics and to training bodies, and they bind neither the federal government nor the states. For legal training, the states are essentially responsible, because they issue examination regulations and training laws. Whether a point is implemented therefore depends on a procedure in the state parliament or on the relevant ordinance.
The steps from a demand to binding law can be summarised as follows.
| Stage | Example | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| Demand or resolution of an expert body | Resolution of the German Jurists’ Conference | no legal binding effect |
| Draft bill or ministerial draft | Draft from a ministry or parliamentary group | not yet law |
| Enacted statute or ordinance | Publication in the official gazette | binding from the date set in the law |
What do the demands mean for your studies?
For law students, three points would matter most: examination material, permitted aids and the rules for marking. Until a reform takes effect, the examination regulations of your state remain decisive, including which aids are allowed. Digitisation is already progressing in some states independently of the conference, for example through the e-examination. Our overview of states with an e-examination in law studies describes the current position.
- Examination material: until a change applies, the content of the current examination regulations counts.
- Aids: whether digital commentaries are allowed is decided by the examination law of each state.
- Spreading papers: a voluntary split of the papers over six months is so far only a proposal.
- Marking: double-blind second marking becomes binding only when states establish it by law or in their examination regulations.
Why the marking rules are particularly contested
The demands on marking concern a point that matters directly to candidates: equal treatment. Double-blind second marking means that the first and second examiner know neither the candidate’s name nor the preliminary grade. Anonymised marking removes personal details from the paper. Both aim to reduce differences between individual examiners. The report also names examination boards with diverse membership as a goal.
Whether the states adopt such standards in their examination regulations is a matter of state law. Until they do, the existing procedures remain in place. If you want to know how your papers were marked, check the inspection rules of your examination office.
What spreading papers would mean for candidates
The demand to spread written papers voluntarily over up to six months would ease the time pressure of the examination. According to the report, it is so far an adopted proposal without the force of a statute. Anyone interested should note that registration, deadlines and the rules on the free attempt depend on state law. A changed examination structure therefore also affects questions such as how a free attempt counts. Our article on the free attempt in the state examination sets out the current deadlines in German.
Frequently asked questions
Has legal training already been reformed?
According to the report, these are demands of the conference. A reform statute cannot be inferred from it. You can find the current state law from the responsible justice ministry or in the official gazette of your state.
Do I have to follow the demands?
No. Your examination is governed by the examination regulations and the requirements of your state. As long as the demands are not implemented, they have no effect on registration, examination content or assessment.
Will the clerkship stay as it is?
According to the report, the proposal to restructure the clerkship with three compulsory placements and 15 elective months found no majority. Whether and how the clerkship changes depends on the states. Ask the state justice administration for the current procedure.
Is the digital examination already available everywhere?
No. Some states are introducing digital examinations step by step, and others are not yet doing so. Our article on the digital examination in the first state examination explains the procedure using existing models.
Where can I read the resolutions in their original form?
The organiser, the German Jurists’ Conference, publishes the wording of the resolutions at djt.de. Look there for the 75th conference in Erfurt and the section on legal training. Quote only what appears there word for word.
What you should do now
- Read the resolutions in their original form before you quote them in a term paper or a conversation.
- Check whether your state has presented a bill or a ministerial draft.
- Base your preparation on the examination regulations that apply at your place of study.
- Follow changes published by the justice ministries and in the official gazettes.
- Use the overview of deadlines and rules to keep your planning current.
Related reading
- Legal Traineeship Insurance: Guide for Lawyers
- E-Examen Jura 2026: Which states introduce the digital examination (in German)
- Digital examination in the first state examination (in German)
- Großer Ratgeber für angehende Juristen (in German)
Last updated: November 2026. This guide is general information, not individual advice.
