News

Case Law

The content relating to case law is provided for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Each case must be evaluated on an individual basis to determine the relevance and applicability of the respective ruling.

Delivery by registered post is no longer sufficient!

Federal Labour Court (BAG), judgment of 7 May 2026, Ref. 2 AZR 184/25
A registered letter posted through a postbox (including a proof of delivery) is no longer sufficient to prove legally secure receipt of important correspondence (e.g. notice of termination, invitation to a BEM meeting). Since Deutsche Post has digitized its delivery procedure for registered letters posted through a postbox, the address and time of delivery are no longer recorded on the proof of delivery. Receipt of the letter can no longer be proven. What remains? Personal delivery, courier delivery, delivery by bailiff?

Blanket exemption clauses following dismissal are invalid!

Federal Labour Court (BAG), judgment of 25 March 2026, Ref. 5 AZR 108/25
The standard blanket clause, under which employers may unilaterally suspend employees from work with continued pay following the giving of notice, is no longer sufficient in itself to constitute a valid suspension. In future, the employer will need a sound justification in the specific case – such as overriding interests of the employer worthy of protection – to justify a suspension. This must also be amended in the employment contract.

Equal Pay/Pay Discrimination – A pair comparison is sufficient,

Federal Labour Court (BAG) judgment of 23 October 2025, Ref. No. 8 AZR 300/24

A female employee does not first have to carry out a statistical analysis of an entire comparison group in order to establish a plausible case of pay discrimination. A single better-paid male colleague may suffice – provided both perform the same or equivalent work. In that case, the presumption under Section 22 of the General Equal Treatment Act (AGG) applies.

Proving value of a medical certificate of incapacity for work,

Federal Labour Court (BAG), judgment of 13 December 2023, Ref. 5 AZR 137/23

The Federal Labour Court has handed down a ruling that undermines the evidential value of a certificate of incapacity for work (AUB). This means that if a dismissal and a sick note coincide in time, the high evidential value of the medical sick note may, under certain circumstances, no longer apply.

Sick note from the first day

Federal Labour Court (BAG), judgment of 14 November 2012 – 5 AZR 886/11

The employer’s right under section 5(1), third sentence, of the Employment Protection Act (EFZG) to require a sick note from the very first day of illness is at the employer’s discretion and is not subject to any specific conditions.

Works council participation in mobile working

Regional Labour Court LAG Hessen, judgment of 18 June 2024 (interim injunction proceedings):

The introduction of mobile working is not subject to the works council’s right of co-determination under Section 87(1) of the Works Constitution Act (BetrVG). Reasoning: The introduction is inextricably linked to the performance of work -> work practices not subject to co-determination.

Regional Labour Court LAG Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, judgment of 25 February 2021 The organization of mobile working is subject to mandatory co-determination under Section 87(1) of the Works Constitution Act (BetrVG).

There is a collective dimension, as this affects the interests of colleagues with regard to availability, coordination of cooperation, data exchange, etc. between them. Furthermore:

- Co-determination under Section 87(1)(6) of the Works Constitution Act (BetrVG) regarding the use of electronic devices, as the data generated by such devices is capable of monitoring the employee’s behaviour and performance.

- Co-determination under Section 87(1)(2) of the Works Constitution Act (BetrVG) regarding the distribution of working hours

- Co-determination under Section 87(1)(7) of the Works Constitution Act (BetrVG) regarding occupational health and safety.

Right of withdrawal in the case of a termination agreement?

Regional Labour Court, LAG Düsseldorf, judgment of 20 January 2010, ref. 12 Sa 962/09

According to this judgment, an employee may withdraw from a termination agreement (statutory right of withdrawal, Section 323 of the German Civil Code (BGB)) if the severance payment agreed in the termination agreement is not paid. According to a ruling by the LAG Düsseldorf, this right of withdrawal is not precluded even if provisional insolvency proceedings are opened in respect of the employer’s assets.