[CLSTR]
< Back to situation

[REVISION HISTORY]

German and European judicial rulings on labor and civil law

Updated 2 times since CLSTR started tracking revisions of this situation.

What changed

2026-09-24 18:00 UTC → 2026-09-29 16:43 UTC · added removed

Recent German and European court rulings have addressed various legal matters concerning employment rights, liability, and property. In labor law, the Higher Labor Court (LAG) Hamm ruled that employees may lose claims to back pay if they unreasonably refuse reasonable offers of continued employment during dismissal protection lawsuits. Additionally, the Higher Labor Court of Lower Saxony determined that irrevocable garden leave, which offsets remaining vacation days, cannot be unilaterally revoked even if a dismissal is overturned. In a separate employment case, the Heilbronn Labor Court found that while sexual harassment at a company event justified dismissal, immediate termination without notice was disproportionate given the employee’s ten-year unblemished service. Expanding on employment regulations, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that travel time to a work site must be classified as working time if the employer dictates the route, time, and vehicle, and the employee is not free to use the time for personal purposes. The court clarified This decision, stemming from a dispute in Spain, clarifies that under the EU Working Time Directive, there is no separate category for ‘travel time’ if an employee is at the employer's disposal. Furthermore, the The German Federal Labour Court (BAG) ruled against a worker seeking additional severance pay. The court determined pay, determining that seniority for severance calculations began in 2017 rather than 2014, 2014 because the worker was initially employed by a temporary agency through an external provider rather than the final employer. Other rulings addressed consumer and property disputes. A Munich District Court rejected provider. Regarding litigation procedures, German labor courts have clarified that employees who successfully challenge a claim dismissal may still be responsible for pain and suffering from an Oktoberfest visitor, finding the ride operator had fulfilled safety obligations. Meanwhile, their own attorney costs under Section 12a of the Higher Regional Labor Court of Frankfurt am Main ruled against a collector attempting Act, as the opposing party is generally not required to reclaim a rare Ferrari, citing insufficient evidence of reimburse these fees in first-instance proceedings. Furthermore, employees must adhere to a sham agreement regarding the vehicle’s transfer strict three-week deadline to file a dealer. lawsuit following a written dismissal notice; delays from insurance discussions or employer negotiations do not extend this timeframe.

Versions

  1. 2026-09-29 16:43 UTC German and European judicial rulings on labor and civil law
  2. 2026-09-24 18:00 UTC German and European judicial rulings on labor and civil law
  3. 2026-09-23 15:33 UTC German judicial rulings on labor and civil law

Only revisions since CLSTR began indexing content versions appear here. Select a version to see what changed compared to the one before it.