Federal Labour Court (judgment of 26 October 2017 – 6 AZR 158/16): A three-year notice period unreasonably disadvantages employees – the statutory basic notice period then applies again.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 22 April 2026 – 10 AZR 28/25): The burden of initiative for target setting lies with the employer; if communication is omitted, 100 % target achievement is regularly assumed.

Federal Labour Court: A right of the employee to draft his or her own employment reference agreed in a court settlement is enforceable – limited only by the duty of truthfulness in references.

Federal Labour Court: Where several periods of parental leave are applied for, special protection against dismissal begins eight weeks before each period – even if all periods were applied for in a single letter.

Federal Labour Court: The right to information under the Pay Transparency Act is limited to the individual establishment and to the last completed calendar year.

Higher Labour Court of Lower Saxony (judgment of 11 December 2025 – 5 SLa 465/25): Anyone who makes no effort to find work for weeks after a dismissal must accept the imputation of fictitious interim earnings.

Federal Labour Court (judgments of 1 April 2026): A mass dismissal notification filed too late or too early renders all dismissals invalid – there is no cure.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 4 December 2025): The cut-off period for summary dismissal runs even while the employee is on holiday – employers must pursue the investigation with urgency.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 4 December 2025 – 2 AZR 51/25): Protection under § 36 HinSchG requires an actual report and a causal link with the detrimental treatment.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 26 June 2025): Failure to appoint an inclusion officer can establish the presumption of discrimination on grounds of severe disability.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 7 May 2026): The postal service's digital delivery record no longer establishes prima facie evidence of receipt – employers must secure service by other means.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 30 October 2025): There is no rigid 25 % limit for the appropriateness of a probationary period under § 15(3) TzBfG; the waiting period under the KSchG remains unaffected.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 25 March 2026): "Release at any time" clauses unreasonably disadvantage employees; an unjustified withdrawal of the company car triggers damages.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 27 March 2025): Merely publishing the vacancy on the job exchange is not enough; without a placement request, a presumption of discrimination is looming.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 28 February 2023): If the position ceases to exist as a result of a transfer to a (foreign) group company, the dismissal is socially justified – courts review only for arbitrariness.

Federal Labour Court (order of 22 May 2025): What matters is the actual integration into the work organisation – employees may be entitled to vote in several establishments.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 26 November 2025): Signing a new employment contract is not an objective reason for excluding employees with old contracts from a general pay rise.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 23 October 2025): Comparison with a single better-paid colleague establishes the presumption of gender-based pay discrimination.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 22 August 2024): § 622(2) BGB applies mandatorily despite a choice of US law if the place of work is in Germany – the form, however, is governed by Art. 11 Rome I Regulation.

Federal Labour Court (judgment of 31 July 2025): Employment relationships that end upon reaching the standard retirement age do not fall under the anti-discrimination protection for fixed-term employees.