Svenja Plonski

After the LAG Düsseldorf awarded an applicant damages of EUR 1,000 under Art. 82 GDPR, the eagerly awaited decision of the BAG (judgement of 5 June 2025 - 8 AZR 117/24) is now available. As part of the appeal proceedings, the plaintiff additionally demanded at least EUR 4,000.00 from the GDPR. Furthermore, he sought judicial clarification to the effect that the defendant was liable for all damages - both present and future - resulting from the data protection breach

In its judgement of 22 May 2020, the Schleswig-Holstein Higher Labour Court ruled that in the event of complications arising after a tattoo, there is no entitlement to continued payment of remuneration for the period of the resulting incapacity to work (judgement of 22 May 2020, case no. 5 Sa 284 a/24).

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).

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 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.

In its judgement of 30 January 2025 (case no. 2 AZR 68/24), the Federal Labour Court ruled that the proof of posting and the status of a notice of termination sent as a registered letter are not suitable for establishing prima facie evidence of receipt of a notice of termination.

In its judgment of 4 October 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that an apology may be sufficient as reasonable compensation for non-material damage under Art. 82 GDPR (ECJ, judgment of 4.10.2024, Ref. C-507/23).

In a ruling dated 15 February 2024 (case reference: 3 Ca 625/23), the Nordhausen Labour Court ruled that deliberate, unprovoked video surveillance in the workplace constitutes a significant violation of the right to informational self-determination and the dignity of employees and can justify termination without notice.

In its judgement of 26 September 2024, the Duisburg Labour Court ruled that an employee is entitled to compensation in accordance with Art 82 GDPR in the amount of EUR 10,000.00 because his employer passed on health data to third parties without authorisation (Duisburg Labour Court, judgement of 26 September 2024, Ref. 3 Ca 77/24)