Not requested leave
The BAG has decided in a fundamental judgment that an employee's entitlement to paid annual leave generally only expires at the end of the calendar year if the employer has informed him beforehand of his specific holiday entitlement and the expiry periods and the employee has not taken the leave of his own free will.
The defendant employed the plaintiff from 01.08.2001 to 31.12.2013 as a scientist. After the termination of the employment relationship, the plaintiff demanded without success to compensate the vacation not taken by him in the amount of 51 working days from 2012 and 2013 with a gross amount in the amount of 11,979.26 euros. He had not applied for this leave during his employment.
The lower courts had granted the claim. The Regional Labour Court had assumed that the plaintiff's vacation claim had expired at the end of the year. The plaintiff could however require payment of damages in the form of replacement vacation, because the deplored one did not follow his obligation to grant him in time vacation from itself. With the termination of the employer-employee relationship, the claim for compensation for holidays was to be settled.
The defendant's appeal was successful before the BAG and leads to the case being referred back to the Higher Labour Court.
In the opinion of the BAG, § 7 (3) sentence 1 BUrlG provides that leave not granted and taken by the end of the year expires. According to previous case law, this had applied even in the event that the employee had requested the employer in good time but without success to grant him leave. However, under certain conditions, the employee could, under certain conditions, claim damages aimed at granting substitute leave during the employment relationship and at compensating for the days of leave not taken after the end of the employment relationship. The BAG had further developed this case law and thus implemented the requirements of the ECJ on the basis of the preliminary ruling of 6 November 2018 (C-684/16 - "Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science"). According to § 7 para. 1 sentence 1 BUrlG, it is reserved to the employer to determine the time of the holiday taking into account the holiday wishes of the employee. Contrary to the assumption of the Higher Labor Court, the provision does not force the employer to grant the employee leave on his own initiative. However, in compliance with Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88/EC (Working Time Directive), the employer is required to take the initiative for the realisation of the holiday entitlement. According to the case law of the European Court of Justice, the employer is obliged "to ensure concretely and in complete transparency that the employee is actually in a position to take his paid annual leave by formally requesting him - if necessary - to do so". The employer must state clearly and in good time that the leave will expire at the end of the reference period or a carry-over period if the employee does not take it.
Therefore, if Paragraph 7 of the BUrlG is interpreted in conformity with the directive, the forfeiture of leave can, as a general rule, only occur if the employer has first specifically requested the employee to take the leave and has clearly and promptly informed him that the leave would otherwise lapse at the end of the leave year or carry-over period. Following the referral back of the case, the Higher Labour Court would have to clarify whether the defendant had complied with his obligations.
LArbG Munich, dated 06.05.2015 - 8 Sa 982/14
Source: BAG press release No. 9/2019 of 19.02.2019
- Legal Tech Act
- Invalidity of the termination of a tenancy agreement
- Influencer means advertising ?
- Employee must prove illness
- Revocation of a car loan agreement
- Liability of a subsidiary for infringement of competition law?
- Time limitation of an employment
- Price increases for new car
- Termination due to reading and disclosure of data
- Termination because of threats against a supervisor
- Proof of e-mail receipt.
- Termination of Leasing Contract
- EU sanctions targeting Russian citizens.
- Transparency register for all companies
- Insolvency law: indebtedness pursuant to section 19 (2) sentence 1 InsO
- The EU's Russia sanctions
- Interest on tax demands and refunds at 6% p.a. unconstitutional
- Data owned by employer
- Weakening of tenants' rights
- Right of withdrawal for brokerage contracts
- BFH, ruling of 23 March 2016, IV R 9/14: Investment deduction amount
- Cartel damage
- Right abuse
- Setting a deadline
- Protection of third parties
- Internet sales platform
- Bonus payments
- Formal requirements in general terms and conditions
- Termination of a management employment
- No cosmetic repairs at the apartment despite "renovation agreement"
- Income tax return due to loan default
- ECJ ruling on copyright infrigements on Youtube
- Gift invalid without notarial certification
- Minimum subsistence Germany 2019-2020
- revocability of employment termination agreements
- Cover under legal expenses insurance
- Termination without notice
- Labour law: leave
- Immigration of qualified staff
- Unpaid leave
- Tax law: liability of a foreign company in germany
- Custom law ruling
- Labour law: compensation adjustment for lawyer fees
- Termination without notice
- Tenancy law
- Immediate notice of dismissal
- Damages in case of violation of a jurisdiction agreement
- Corona quarantine: legal aspects
- No termination without notice
- Labour law decisions around Corona
- Dismissal due to Covid 19 quarantine invalid