Whistleblower Protection: No "Comprehensive Insurance" Against Dismissal (Federal Labour Court, 2 AZR 51/25)

Whistleblower protection. The Federal Labour Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht, BAG; judgment of 4 December 2025 – 2 AZR 51/25) makes clear that whistleblower protection must continue to be taken seriously. In § 36(2) of the German Whistleblower Protection Act (Hinweisgeberschutzgesetz, HinSchG), the statute even provides for a presumption in favour of the whistleblower (statutory term: "reporting person", hinweisgebende Person) that the reporting person suffered a detriment in connection with, and as a consequence of, the report or disclosure.

But this does not yet create absolute "comprehensive insurance" against dismissal. This becomes particularly relevant for employees in their "probationary period" (meaning the six-month waiting period until general protection against dismissal arises under § 1(1) of the German Protection Against Dismissal Act, KSchG) and for employees in small businesses (i.e. those below the threshold of § 23(1) KSchG with no more than ten employees).

In its judgment, the BAG held: "Whistleblower protection under § 36 HinSchG does not apply merely because the whistleblower asserts that the detrimental act or omission is based on the fact that he or she obtained knowledge of a breach within the meaning of § 2 HinSchG. Rather, a causal link between the detriment and the report or disclosure is required."

Conclusion: Whistleblowers must be taken seriously. They are protected when they make reports. Mere knowledge of a breach is not enough for that. Anyone who wishes to invoke statutory protection must also have the courage to actually make the report in question. In addition, he or she must be able to show that any reprisal suffered occurred in connection with the report.