Do I need real estate legal protection?

Unfortunately, you are still confusing two completely different types of insurance. To clarify once again:
Liability simply means: If someone causes damage to another person, that damage is financially covered by the insurance within the scope of the benefits. (=So damages to others)

(Property)Legal protection simply means: It protects against the financial risk arising from legal disputes related to properties. (=So damages to you and to others)

But well, I don’t want to start a discussion about insurance benefits here. The questioner just wanted to know what experiences prevail. To avoid any confusion here, I wrote the objection as a positive contribution.

Basically, the tendency in Germany is towards "overinsurance," so it is only right to carefully consider what you want to insure. For me, we included legal protection in our household insurance for about €120 per year; you can’t go wrong with that. For example, neighbors have already used theirs twice. If they had to advance or even pay the costs (court costs, lawyer fees), that would have been over €10,000... so keep your eyes open! :)

Oh, one more addition: disputes with contractors or, in general, construction law are never insured. Because that, in turn, is contract law and not property law, and as far as I know, there is no insurance for that or none that you can afford to pay.

Unfortunately, you are still confusing two completely different insurances.

I am very well aware of the difference and do not deny it either. I just added that some legal risks are already covered by existing liability insurances, as they provide passive legal protection.

I am well aware of the difference and do not dispute it. I just added that some legal risks are already covered by existing liability insurance, as they provide passive legal protection.

Alright then, that's good :-) Hope our side discussion has also helped the person who made the inquiry.

Best regards

it was clear from the beginning what alex meant ...

basically, you can insure any crap. the cost-benefit factor theoretically does not pay off with any insurance, unless the insured event occurs. in poker, this is called "pot odds", meaning the ratio of the chips to be bet compared to the chips already in play and the calculated probability of winning. for example, if you have to put in 100 chips to win 2000 chips and the chance of winning is 50:50 (at least that’s what you think), the 100 chips are definitely well invested. and with insurance, it’s like with the lottery. you invest 5 euros in the lottery, with a chance of 1:140,000,000 to maybe win 10,000,000€. the pot odds are bad because the lottery company also wants to make a profit. and it’s the same with insurance. every insurance is completely unprofitable in terms of pot odds, and it’s like bluffing with "As hoch" against a guaranteed "royal flush". but there are plenty of hands where the other side then has nothing at all and you win (the insured event occurs).

.... Neighbors, for example, have already made use of it twice. If they had to advance the costs or even pay (court costs, lawyer fees), it would have been over €10,000... so eyes open! :)...

: May I ask why the neighbors made use of the insurance? I am still missing representative examples where I can imagine that this could also happen to me.

Sure. It was a dispute over a sinking boundary stone/fence. Google it, you'll find hundreds of examples.