AbstractCopper(II) and nickel(II) compounds with (S)‐(+)‐1‐amino‐2‐propanol (S‐ap) are described and compared with the corresponding compounds containing racemic 1‐amino‐2‐propanol ((RS)‐ap) previously reported. Both ligands give analogous coordination compounds, except in the case of the chlorides of formula MCl2(ap)2, which are only obtained with (RS)‐ap. Similar differences were found in solution using conductometric titrations. Infrared and ligand field spectra for the racemic and optically active compounds are almost identical. Circular dichroism spectra show that Λ(δδδ) is the most stable configuration for the tris‐chelates. For the bis‐compounds the ligands could be assigned tocis‐ ortrans‐positions by comparing the rotational strength of thed‐dtransitions. In addition, the different melting points of the isomers are related to their different geometries. The comparison further indicates that in compounds with monodentate coordinating ap ligands steric hindrance is less important in the c