In a ruling dated 26 February 2025 (case no. 5 U 11/24), the Hanseatic Higher Regional Court of Hamburg confirmed the dismissal of the action brought by the Federal Association of Consumer Organisations against a Hamburg-based energy supplier.
In its judgement of 3 April 2025 - 4 U 29/24, the Court of Appeal ruled that an image campaign by an undertaker with false claims does not exceptionally constitute an infringement of competition law, as it does not already constitute a commercial act within the meaning of the UWG.
In a decision dated 10 March 2025, the Hessian Regional Labour Court ruled that the unauthorised forwarding of professional content to a private email account can lead to exclusion from the works council. (Hessisches LAG, judgement of 10 March 2025, Ref.: 16 TaBV 109/24).
The federal states are on the way to regulating the monitoring of compliance with the BFSG by a standardised market surveillance authority. The current status and consequences are documented here.
In its ruling of 6 February 2025 (case no. 15 U 43/24), the Hanseatic Higher Regional Court of Hamburg dismissed all competition law claims brought by the manufacturer of the well-known "Geo-Cube" necklaces against three cube necklaces sold via otto.de. The court found that the low-priced competitor products did not constitute an avoidable misrepresentation of origin or unfair exploitation of reputation and also clarified that the scope of protection under Section 4 No. 3 UWG remains narrow in the case of merely average competitive character.
In its judgement of 16 April 2025 (case reference: 10 AZR 80/24), the Federal Labour Court ruled for the first time that a contractually agreed commission claim can also be fulfilled in the cryptocurrency Ether, provided this is objectively in the employee's interest. It should be noted that the part of the salary that is within the garnishment-free limit is excluded from this. This non-garnishable amount of pay must continue to be paid out in euros.
In its judgement of 03.04.2025 - 4 U 29/24, the Higher Regional Court of Hamm confirmed the obvious on the interpretation of the JuSchG and made an exciting decision on the presentation requirements for the competitor position in a warning letter.
In its judgement of 7 November 2024, the Baden-Württemberg State Labour Court (case no. 17 Sa 2/24) ruled that designations in a job advertisement such as "digital native", "team buddy" or "dynamic" can constitute age discrimination.
On 18 October 2024, the Federal Council approved the "Fourth Act to Reduce Bureaucracy for Citizens, Business and the Administration". The aim: less effort for business, more time for the core business. A central element of the law is the shortening of the retention period for accounting documents under commercial and tax law from ten to eight years. What initially sounds like a noticeable relief, however, also has a data protection component that companies should not underestimate.
The Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania Regional Labour Court (LAG) clarified in its ruling of 28 January 2025 (Ref.: 5 SLa 159/24) that different remuneration for employees performing the same job does not automatically violate the principle of equal treatment under labour law or the equal pay requirement pursuant to Section 7 of the German Pay Transparency Act (EntgTranspG). In the case on which the judgement was based, a personnel manager sued for a significantly higher salary after colleagues who were subsequently hired received significantly higher remuneration. The court denied the plaintiff's claim to payment of the differential remuneration because better professional qualifications and longer, more relevant professional experience constitute objectively justified reasons that allow for unequal treatment.
About the new EU guidelines for environmental advertising claims (green claims) and the associated legal requirements. The focus is on the EmpCo Directive, which introduces stricter rules for advertisers.
The EU Regulation on Artificial Intelligence (AI Regulation, AI Regulation or AI Act) has been in force since 2 February 2025 and introduces the first binding obligations. A central regulation concerns the obligation of companies to train their employees* in the use of AI systems if AI systems are used (e.g. in the HR department, in customer service or in sales). The following article looks at what this means for companies and their employees in concrete terms and the consequences of a possible breach:
