Damages

Extraordinary termination due to feigning incapacity for work

On 7 July 2017 the State Labour Court in Cologne (docket number 4 Sa 936/16) decided that a strong suspicion that an incapacity for work is feigned, is sufficient to justify a termination for good cause, in the course of a dismissal on grounds of suspicion, even though a certificate of incapacity exists. In general a certificate of incapacity for work has such strong evidential value that a trial judge is usually entitled to consider …

Extraordinary termination due to feigning incapacity for work Read More »

Commencement of the „two months period“ for asserting claims for damages due to a violation of the General Act on Equal Treatment

On 29 June 2017 the Federal Labour Court ruled that a “rejection of an application” by a company requires an explicit or implied statement from the company that can be interpreted by the applicant in the way that his application was not successful. Only if such statement is received the two months period for asserting claims for damages due to a violation of the General Act on Equal Treatment commences (docket number 8 AZR 402/15). …

Commencement of the „two months period“ for asserting claims for damages due to a violation of the General Act on Equal Treatment Read More »

Discriminatory job advertisement – No claim for damages if applicant was not “seriously” applying for the job

If an applicant applies for a job solely to bring a claim then he will have no claim for damages, even if the job advertisement violates the General Act on Equal Treatment (judgement of the Munich labour court dated 24 November 2016, docket number 173 C 8860/16). A company advertised a voluntary job at a marketing agency in a local newspaper. The role required the employee to have frequent conversations with customers over the phone. …

Discriminatory job advertisement – No claim for damages if applicant was not “seriously” applying for the job Read More »

Rail Cartel: Which court is competent for recovery claims against a former manager?

This is the first case in Germany in which a company has claimed for recovery from a former manager because he (allegedly) was responsible for the company infringing competion law. The decision of the Federal Labour Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht) was thus eagerly awaited. By judgment of 29 June 2017 (docket number 8 AZR 189/15), the Federal Labour Court annulled the former judgment and referred it back to the court of appeal in order to make further determinations. According to the published press release it could not …

Rail Cartel: Which court is competent for recovery claims against a former manager? Read More »