After the sensational Facebook ruling rendered by the Federal Labour Court in 2016, the discrepancy between rapid digitalisation and restrictive case law with regard to Section 87(I)(6) of the Works Constitution Act has once again become the focus of attention in a labour law dispute. The Hamburg Regional Labour Court recently addressed the question of whether a Twitter account maintained by an employer constitutes a technical device that is intended to monitor employees' performance and conduct.
To ensure that serving a dismissal notice will withstand a court's scrutiny, it should be handed to the employee in person and the employee should countersign a duplicate. However, if the dismissal notice is served by an external courier, the employer may have to comply with different data protection requirements to avoid breaching data protection law.
In view of a statutory transition clause in the Temporary Employment Act, for some deployment agencies the 18-month maximum hiring out period will end shortly – for external employees deployed as of 1 April 2017, the expiry date could have been the end of September 2018. To avoid all possible risk of overstepping the maximum hiring out period, personnel services providers and companies using such providers are advised to determine precisely what they consider the expiration date to be.
According to the Federal Court of Justice's established case law, the penalty for tax evasion of more than €1 million should generally be imprisonment rather than a suspended sentence. However, the court recently ruled that these principles cannot apply to breach of trust allegations. The decision has significant implications for white collar crime and compliance.
A recent Federal Constitutional Court decision has clarified whether documents relating to internal investigations can be regarded as defence documents. Against the hope of companies and law firms, the court rejected the general prohibition on the seizure of such documents; however, it indicated that such a prohibition should always be determined on a case-by-case basis.
The Frankfurt Higher Regional Court recently implemented the European Court of Justice's (ECJ's) sailing instruction and decided in favour of the luxury cosmetics manufacturer Coty on third-party platform bans in selective distribution. The judgment comes after the ECJ – in an abstract manner – declared third-party platform bans in the selective distribution of luxury goods permissible under competition law.
The Federal Constitutional Court recently restricted the option of concluding fixed-term employment contracts without an objective reason with applicants who have previously worked for the employer. The court also recognised that an unlimited prohibition on prior employment can unreasonably restrict the option of fixed-term contracts without objective reason. This ruling has consequences for current fixed-term contracts and for future hiring practice.
Litigants may now seek cartel damages for a longer period as the Federal Court of Justice has affirmed the suspension of the statute of limitations for antitrust claims before 1 July 2005. The court's judgment creates legal certainty and increases Germany's attractiveness as a jurisdiction for plaintiffs in cartel damages cases. It is also a major setback for defendants in cases concerning cement, truck and sugar cartels (among others), which will face even bigger damages claims.
The federal government plans to create new corporate penalties and abandon the discretionary principle which has thus far applied in corporate prosecutions. Further, the upper limit of penalties will be significantly increased. At the same time, the government aims to establish legal requirements for internal investigations that provide an incentive for investigation support.
The Federal Court of Justice recently held that absolute prohibitions to participate in online price comparison tools imposed on distributors in selective distribution systems amount to a hardcore restriction under Article 4c of the EU Block Exemption Regulation on Vertical Restraints. A closer look at the German decision reveals some doubts as to its compatibility with two European Court of Justice decisions.
The Christian Democratic Union of Germany, the Christian Social Union in Bavaria and the Social Democratic Party of Germany recently concluded negotiations for a new grand coalition. The 177-page coalition agreement contains very specific proposals for changes to labour law, including with regard to the maximum duration of successive fixed-term employment contracts, substantial restrictions for fixed-term contracts and employees' entitlement to part-time work for a limited period.
The Pay Transparency Act bundles together some regulations and requirements that had already been established and is intended to close the adjusted gender pay gap. That the act's practical relevance has proved limited thus far can be explained by the fact that it was not possible to assert the information claim until January 6 2018. Nevertheless, it should be kept in mind that the legal consequences of failings to provide information have yet to be clarified.
A recent Celle Regional Court decision on a clear resale price maintenance case has been heavily debated because the court held that restrictions of competition by object can be compatible with Article 101(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union if they have no potentially significant effects on competition. The Federal Supreme Court has since overruled the decision, leaving it open as to whether the potential effects on competition must be considered in such cases.
German businesses have steadily expanded their compliance structures and internal training programmes and have never been in a better position than they are now. However, declining support for compliance issues among management is giving compliance officers cause for concern, and recent compliance scandals appear to indicate that further work is necessary to make management fully acknowledge the significance of compliance matters.
The Act to Strengthen Company Pensions has introduced pure defined contribution schemes for the first time. This means that employers will not promise specific or calculable retirement benefits, but merely undertake to pay specific contributions to an external pension provider. However, it remains to be seen whether the legislature has managed to strengthen and further spread company pension schemes as intended based on the act.