general equality law

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Basic data
Title: general equality law
Abbreviation: AGG
Type: Federal law
Scope: Federal Republic of Germany
Legal matter: Private law , labor law
References : 402-40
Issued on: August 14, 2006
( Federal Law Gazette I, p. 1897, 1910 )
Entry into force on: August 18, 2006
Last change by: Art. 8 G of April 3, 2013 (Federal Law Gazette I p. 610)
Effective date of the
last change:
December 21, 2012
(Art. 10 sentence 2 G of April 3, 2013)
GESTA : D073
Weblink: Text of the AGG
Please note the note on the applicable legal version.

The General Equal Treatment Act (AGG) - also known colloquially as the Anti-Discrimination Act - is a German federal law that " prevents and eliminates discrimination based on race or ethnic origin, gender , religion or belief , disability , age or sexual identity should". In order to achieve this goal, the persons protected by the law receive legal claims against employers and private individuals if they violate the legal prohibitions of discrimination against them . When it came into force, the Employee Protection Act was replaced.


The General Equal Treatment Act applies in its labor law part ( Sections 6-18 ) to employees and trainees in the private sector , but also to job applicants. For civil servants , judges and employees of the federal and state governments , it applies accordingly in service law ( Section 24 ). In addition, it also applies to certain areas of private contract law ( Sections 19–21 ).

The principle of equal treatment standardized in Art. 3 of the Basic Law (GG) has already applied , but only for action by the state. In the relationship between citizens, Art. 3 GG, like all norms of public law, is fundamentally not applicable. However, in its case law , the Federal Labor Court has already directly applied the fundamental rights norms in the employer-employee relationship.

The specific prohibitions of discrimination in Article 3.3 of the Basic Law are not completely congruent with those of the General Equal Treatment Act: Article 3.3 of the Basic Law prohibits discrimination on the basis of a person's geographical origin, but not the AGG. According to the AGG it would have z. B. no consequences if a Cologne entrepreneur would not hire any Düsseldorf employees and would also admit to them; regardless of which ethnic group the Cologne entrepreneur and the Düsseldorf people affected belong to. Conversely, the GG does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of a person's sexual identity, but the AGG does.

The special feature of the General Equal Treatment Act in the civil law part is that it intervenes as a protective law in private law transactions and thus restricts private autonomy. In the view of the legislature, since the protection of fundamental rights primarily encompasses state action, this is necessary in order to implement the objective-legal equal treatment mandate of the Basic Law for the behavior of citizens among one another.

Areas of application

The General Equal Treatment Act does not apply in all social and legal areas and does not prohibit any form of unequal treatment. Rather, it only prohibits discrimination if it is based on certain characteristics specified in the law. Second, unequal treatment is only prohibited in certain legally specified situations.

Personal characteristics

The General Equal Treatment Act only prohibits discrimination if it is linked to one of the following personal characteristics:

Compared to the EU directive, in which “sexual orientation” is defined, “sexual identity” is used here with a reference to the already existing § 75 BetrVG . In any case, the sexual self-definition as well as the sexual orientation towards other people ( sexual orientation ) are recorded. In addition, transvestism is also included. According to the justification of the law, intersexuality and transsexuality should also be protected by this, but according to the case law of the European Court of Justice as gender.

On the other hand , it does not regulate discrimination based on other characteristics from the EU Charter , such as discrimination based on property and social origin .

Material scope

Objectively, the law refers to § 2 Paragraph 1 AGG

  • the conditions for access to employment and for career advancement, including selection criteria and conditions of employment,
  • employment and working conditions including pay and dismissal conditions,
  • access to career counseling , vocational training, vocational training , professional development as well as retraining and practical work experience,
  • Membership and participation in trade unions and employers' associations and associations whose members belong to a specific professional group,
  • social protection, including social security and health services,
  • the social benefits,
  • the education,
  • access to and supply of goods and services available to the public, including housing.

Forms of disadvantage

A distinction must be made between the following forms of unequal treatment:

  • direct disadvantage ( Section 3 (1) AGG): less favorable treatment of one person compared to another in a comparable situation,
  • indirect disadvantage ( Section 3 (2) AGG): disadvantage through seemingly neutral regulations, measures, criteria or procedures that have a de facto discriminatory effect,
  • Harassment ( Section 3 Paragraph 3 AGG): Violation of the dignity of the person, in particular by creating an environment characterized by intimidation, hostility, humiliation, degradation or insults,
  • sexual harassment ( Section 3 (4) AGG),
  • the instruction to one of these behaviors ( § 3 Abs. 5 AGG).

For the question of what exactly is meant by the definition of indirect discrimination given in Section 3 (2) AGG , the previous case law of the European Court of Justice and the Federal Labor Court can provide help. The two courts have done extensive preparatory work to clarify the facts of indirect discrimination. The prohibition of indirect discrimination is originally addressed to the legislature and to other parties insofar as they take collective measures, i. H. Regulate working and living conditions, or specify the implementation of contractual obligations through measures with collective effect. In essence, the point is to punish procedures as discrimination that disadvantage certain groups of people, i. H. treat them less favorably, avoiding explicitly naming the forbidden discrimination features, but by choosing the apparently neutral criteria, they are designed to disadvantage precisely those people who have one or more of the features prohibited by the AGG.

In the starting point, indirect discrimination follows a uniform pattern, despite the complex definition of the law:

  1. First, groups are formed according to criteria that are not expressly prohibited. For example, the employer differentiates between part-time and full-time employees in one measure, or a landlord differentiates between employees and unemployed or between self-employed and employees.
  2. Then one group is collectively and directly disadvantaged within the meaning of Section 3 (1) AGG. This can be done by only benefiting the other group or by directly treating the group in question worse. For example, part-time workers are not granted sick pay.
  3. If the disadvantage of the educated group now - statistically speaking - particularly affects those who are to be protected by prohibitions of discrimination - i.e. affects more foreigners than natives or more women than men - because they are in the educated and disadvantaged group in relation to the other group are overrepresented, there is indirect discrimination.
  4. Indirect discrimination is, however, permissible as an exception if this statistical “special concern” of a group protected by the AGG is only a by-product of a permitted goal. So anyone who pursues the permitted goal of only rewarding the loyalty of permanent employees with a Christmas bonus may exempt temporary employees from payment, even if this measure predominantly affects women.

However, this cannot be inferred from the wording of the law.

Unauthorized discrimination in labor law

Justification of unequal treatment

In the employment relationship, agreements that violate the prohibition of discrimination are ineffective ( Section 7 (2) AGG).

However, the employer can object that the unequal treatment is justified in individual cases ( Sections 5 and 8 to 10 AGG). Different treatment may be justified if it adequately removes existing discrimination. An absolute priority of the protected group is excluded.

A different treatment, e.g. B. because of the sex, is only permitted if the sex is an indispensable prerequisite for the activity because of the type of activity to be carried out or the conditions of its exercise, e.g. B. Hiring a ballet dancer ( Section 8 (1) AGG). For this objection, the employer bears the burden of presentation and proof in the process ( Section 22 AGG). So he will lose the process if he submits insufficiently or if the proof fails.

Different treatments based on religion or belief are also permitted for employees of religious communities ( Section 9 AGG). So it is z. B. does not constitute forbidden discrimination if a Muslim is not employed as a cleaner in a Catholic kindergarten. This corresponds to the existing legal situation in labor law, which, in contrast to companies with a tendency , completely exempts religious communities from the Works Constitution Act . In private companies, on the other hand, the entrepreneur is not allowed to make a selection based on his own religious or ideological convictions when selecting job applicants. So a Muslim must also employ Jews and vice versa. With the judgment (2 AZR 579/12) of April 25, 2013, the Federal Labor Court also confirmed the possibility of extraordinary dismissal of an employee of a church institution if he violates his contractual obligations (employment contract guidelines (AVR)) by leaving the church . The employee is not discriminated against under the AGG.

Age-related inequality of treatment can be justified if it is objectively appropriate and has a legitimate aim, e.g. B. Minimum or maximum age for employment, minimum age for claiming claims from company pension schemes ( § 10 AGG).

Unequal treatment is generally allowed if an outlawed criterion does not form the main motive for the unequal treatment. The labor court in Berlin determined that it was permissible not to hire applicants because of a lack of knowledge of German, although such practices mainly affect people of foreign ethnic origin.

The automatic termination of the employment contract for reasons of age, as provided for in the framework collective agreement for commercial employees in building cleaning, is also compatible with Directive 2000/78 on which the AGG is based.

Legal consequences of unauthorized unequal treatment

If there is unjustified unequal treatment, the employee has the right to lodge a complaint ( Section 13 AGG).

The employer must then take the appropriate, necessary and appropriate measures to prevent the disadvantage against employees who violate the prohibition of discrimination, e.g. B. Warning, transfer, termination ( Section 12 Paragraph 3 AGG), or in the event of discrimination by third parties, protective measures for employees ( Section 12 Paragraph 4 AGG).

In the case of harassment, there may also be a right to refuse performance: If the employer does not take any measures or takes unsuitable measures to end the harassment, the employee can refuse performance if and to the extent that this is necessary for his protection ( Section 14 AGG). In this case, the entitlement to remuneration remains.

In addition, the employee has a claim for damages ( Section 15 (1) AGG), which is aimed at compensation for financial loss , unless the employer was not at fault. It is disputed whether this claim also includes the earnings that the rejected applicant misses.

The employee also has a claim for compensation that is independent of the fault of the employer ( Section 15 (2) AGG), which provides for adequate compensation in money for the unequal treatment suffered in the event of non-financial losses. The amount of the compensation claim is based u. a. according to the type and severity of the damage to interests, the cause and motives of the employer, the duration, the degree of fault of the employer and whether it is a repeat case. In comparable cases of unequal treatment (according to the former § 611a BGB ), the Federal Labor Court grants a compensation claim of at least one month's salary. The AGG provides for a maximum of three monthly salaries in the event of discriminatory non-employment. However, this limit does not apply if the applicant would have been hired in any case without the discrimination.

A period of two months applies to the assertion of damage claims and compensation claims ( Section 15 (4) AGG). The labor courts are responsible ( Section 61b ArbGG ).

In the event of a violation of the prohibition of discrimination ( Section 7 AGG), there is no entitlement to recruitment, vocational training or career advancement ( Section 15 (6) AGG).

The employer may not discriminate against employees for exercising rights under the AGG ( Section 16 AGG).

If there is a works council or a trade union is represented in the company, they have their own right of action in the event of gross violations by the employer, even without the consent of the person concerned ( Section 17 (2) AGG). This does not apply to Staff in the public service .

Reactions from employers and HR managers

Employers and HR managers have had to deal with the following questions since the AGG came into force:

  • Who must be protected from discrimination and how (e.g. own freelancers)?
  • Is there indirect / direct, conscious / unconscious / approvingly accepted discrimination in the company, or are there situations in which its occurrence can be foreseen?
  • What are the characteristics of annoyance or disadvantage?
  • Can disadvantages be justified in accordance with the AGG?

In particular, obligations, liability risks and compensation claims that the AGG reassigns to employers must be observed: These changes relate to the employer's protection, organizational and action obligations, the reversal of the burden of proof to the detriment of the employer, the compensation claims , also interim injunction proceedings and, last but not least, the complaint and right to refuse performance of the employees.

Employers must observe the new rights of the works council (but not the staff council ), the necessary new regulations for job advertisements, recruitment and selection procedures , rejections, new standards also for employment contracts , dismissals , social selection , job references. The new regulations relate to organization, cooperation, staff management , salary issues as well as the co-determination modalities of employees and cooperation with the works council.

In application procedures, it has become common practice not to give any reasons for not hiring a candidate. Instead, when application documents are returned, cover letters often only contain sample texts such as: “Unfortunately, your application could not be considered.” When deciding to proceed in this way, employers hope that they will not offer any points of attack to suspect that it is wrong a case of inadmissible discrimination against the respective applicant.


The insurance industry is responding now by offering special insurance policies (the so-called English Liability Employment Practices ). Based on US models, employers should be able to insure themselves against the risk of claims by employees and applicants due to violation of the AGG - in particular in the case of claims under Section 15 AGG .

Unauthorized discrimination in civil law

Also in general civil law transactions, i. H. in the establishment, implementation and cancellation of contracts, discrimination based on one of the characteristics specified in the law is fundamentally inadmissible ( Sections 19 to 21 AGG). However, this essentially only applies

In addition, "discrimination on grounds of race or ethnic origin" is also not permitted in the establishment, implementation and termination of other civil law obligations within the meaning of Section 2 (1) No. 5 to 8 AGG ( Section 19 (2) AGG) if they do not concern the exceptions to balanced settlement structures or balanced economic, social or cultural structures named in accordance with Section 19 (3) AGG .

Non-discrimination bans do not apply

  • family and inheritance law legal relationships ( Section 19 Paragraph 4 AGG), as well as on
  • Obligations in which a special closeness or trust of the parties or their relatives is established; this also applies to tenancy law, in particular if the parties or their relatives live on the same property ( Section 19 (5) AGG). The letting of no more than 50 apartments is usually not a mass business within the meaning of the General Equal Treatment Act.

If there is objectively a disadvantage, this can be justified in individual cases, i. H. allowed and without sanctions. Unequal treatment for objective reasons is justified, e.g. B. to avert danger ( § 20 AGG).

In the case of insurance contracts under private law, unequal treatment on the basis of gender is permitted if gender is a determining factor in the actuarial risk assessment. The corresponding data and the calculation must be disclosed. The costs of pregnancy and childbirth must not lead to different premiums or benefits; rather, they must be distributed gender-neutral (Section 20 (2) AGG).

In the event of unjustified unequal treatment, the disadvantaged person has claims for removal, injunctive relief and material / immaterial damage claims, which must be asserted within a period of two months ( Section 21 AGG).

Tax law

In terms of tax law , compensation that is paid on the basis of the AGG is assessed as tax-free compensation for pain and suffering.

Special features in the process

Burden of proof

The plaintiff must first 1. demonstrate and prove a less favorable treatment towards another person 2. in a comparable situation 3. directly or indirectly because of a reason mentioned in § 1 AGG. According to § 22 AGG, the plaintiff only has to prove circumstantial evidence with regard to the third requirement, which suggests a disadvantage due to a reason mentioned in § 1 AGG with the consequence that the defendant bears the burden of proof that there is no disadvantage prohibited under the AGG . The defendant then bears the full burden of presentation and proof of the absence of a prohibited disadvantage.

The facts presented by the plaintiff must, from an objective point of view, based on general life experience, indicate with a predominant probability that a disadvantage has occurred due to a feature mentioned in § 1 AGG. Then it is sufficient that a criterion which is inadmissible according to § 1 AGG has only played a role for a less favorable treatment in addition to other criteria (so-called motive bundle). For a "predominant probability" it is sufficient, for example, if the employer does not formulate a job advertisement in a gender-neutral way, but general statistics, for example on the underrepresentation of women in management positions, do not have a sufficient indicator function.

As part of the judicial assessment of the facts, u. a. the so-called testing procedure represent an actual reference point. The landlord or employer is presented with another qualitatively comparable application from another (fictitious) person for the apartment or job to which the discrimination criterion does not apply. In order to draw conclusions about discrimination, however, it must be possible to exclude other, non-discriminatory explanations of disadvantage as far as possible, in that the person concerned and the test person are largely the same with the exception of the presumed discrimination criterion. In labor law, this applies in particular to objective suitability for the position to be filled.

In the event of success, the claimant's claim to compensation in accordance with Section 15 (2) AGG is limited; He does not receive any compensation.

Term of action

Unless otherwise agreed by the parties to the collective bargaining agreement , a claim for damages or compensation must be submitted to the employer in writing within two months of the rejection of the application or knowledge of the act of discrimination, Section 15 (4) AGG. A further period of three months from the written assertion must be observed for a complaint to the labor court , § 61b para. 1 ArbGG.

European law background

Main article: European law requirements on the prohibition of discrimination
The regulatory areas of the EC anti-discrimination directives

The General Equal Treatment Act serves to implement four European directives from the years 2000 to 2004, namely around the

  • Council Directive 2000/43 / EC of 29 June 2000 on the application of the principle of equal treatment regardless of race or ethnic origin (OJ EC No. L 180 p. 22) - so-called anti-racism directive -
  • Council Directive 2000/78 / EC of November 27, 2000 establishing a general framework for the implementation of equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ EC No. L 303 p. 16) - so-called Framework Directive Employment -
  • Directive 2002/73 / EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2002 amending Council Directive 76/207 / EEC on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women with regard to access to employment, vocational training and promotion as well as with regard to the working conditions (OJ EC No. L 269 p. 15) - so-called gender guideline -
  • Council Directive 2004/113 / EC of 13 December 2004 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in access to and supply of goods and services (OJ No. L 373, 21/12/2004 p. 37 -43)

Some legal experts are of the opinion that the General Equal Treatment Act does not adequately implement the requirements of the four EC directives and is therefore contrary to European law in some points.

Origin of the law

The General Equal Treatment Act is essentially based on the draft of the so-called Anti-Discrimination Act (ADG), which was drawn up and discussed in the 15th legislative period , but never became law due to the discontinuity of the legislative process.

After the early elections to the Bundestag, the Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen parliamentary group brought the ADG draft back to the Bundestag in December. This draft was discussed in the Bundestag, but did not find a parliamentary majority.

At the beginning of May 2006, the SPD, CDU and CSU agreed on a new draft law. This government draft was called the General Equal Treatment Act, but its content was largely identical to the draft of the 2005 Anti-Discrimination Act.

Important changes in the content of the General Equal Treatment Act to the draft Anti-Discrimination Act are as follows:

Particularly controversial is the fact that the labor court's right of termination is excluded from Section 2 (4) of the General Equal Treatment Act. This is likely to run counter to the implementation of the EC Directive and violate Art. 3 Para. 1 lit. c of Directive 2000/78 / EC . According to this, the prohibitions of discrimination (inter alia because of sexual orientation) also apply to “the conditions for dismissal”. The term “dismissal conditions” also includes dismissals.

In a landmark ruling in November 2008, the Federal Labor Court decided that the General Equal Treatment Act not only applies to recruitment and during professional practice, but must also be taken into account in the event of termination.

The law was passed with the votes of the CDU , SPD and the Greens , it was rejected by the FDP and the Left Party , each with opposing reasons.

The law in the political dispute

Opponent of the law

The proposed law was and is subject to sharp political criticism from the business associations and the FDP , in particular on the following points:

  • Restriction of private autonomy for providers of goods and services, since they - unlike private consumers - have to treat their customers equally
  • Creation of a bureaucratic effort, since by reversing the burden of proof, every supplier of goods has to keep evidence that he has not discriminated
  • difficult questions of demarcation between permitted and prohibited unequal treatment
  • assumed additional burden on the judiciary with a large number of processes
  • Imposition of the state requirement of equal treatment on all private individuals and thus a reduction of free market, namely also irrational, freedom. This freedom is in turn subject to the protection of the values ​​of the Basic Law as general freedom of action, freedom of economic activity and protection of one's own religious convictions
  • unilateral protection of only a few selected groups while ignoring other groups prone to discrimination such as children and families

Furthermore, some critics fear that the situation of members of a minority could be made worse by the General Equal Treatment Act. For example, employers could in future refrain from inviting members of minorities for job interviews in order to avoid false or erroneous allegations of discrimination.

Since the law was introduced, opponents of the law have reported about people who only apply to companies and firms for job advertisements with discriminatory content for the purpose of obtaining claims for damages under the AGG. According to reports, alleged applicants should interpret formulations such as “young team” (age discrimination) or “application with photo” (discrimination based on race or origin) as signs of possible discrimination. The applicants have no interest in employment, but would assert rights under the AGG after a rejection. Critics call this practice AGG hopping after "611a hopping". Section 611a of the German Civil Code (BGB) (old version) regulated the equal treatment of men and women in job advertisements, and the same phenomenon was already observed when Section 611a BGB was introduced in 1980. It was not until 25 years later that the Potsdam Labor Court coined the term in a judgment.

On the other hand, it should be considered that - in comparison to the Basic Law and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights - essential areas of discrimination are not dealt with in the General Equal Treatment Act; So above all discrimination based on social origin or because of having a large number of children. This leads to an anti-discrimination hierarchy and there is a risk that disadvantage based on social origin is by definition not perceived as discrimination. The inclusion of social origin in the anti-discrimination directives was proposed, but was not considered in the agreement on the Amsterdam Treaties.

However, the General Equal Treatment Act does not remove any existing protection. There is no draft law to abolish social discrimination in Germany, but it is being discussed at European level.

According to an Allensbach survey published in March 2005, the majority of the population rejected the anti-discrimination law discussed at the time, using the example of a lawsuit against a landlord.

Lawyers also criticize the law's technical weaknesses. In addition to unnecessarily complicated sentence structures, it is noticeable that the law is not intended to apply to the area of ​​dismissals, but on the other hand contains express regulations specifically for this area.

Advocate of the law

Supporters come mainly from the area of ​​the disabled and women's associations , the lesbian and gay association in Germany (LSVD) , the DGB , the party Die Linke , the Greens and the social democracy .

They point out that the burden of proof - for the area of ​​gender-based discrimination - has been in the BGB for 25 years. Furthermore, it is nonsensical if discrimination based on ethnic origin is prohibited, but not based on disability, sexual identity or other criteria included in the AGG by the legislator. Instead, they demand equal protection for everyone.

You point out that it is a matter of including all the criteria of Article 13 of the Amsterdam Treaty. These criteria are also made binding by the EU for labor law.

In particular, arguments are made with the moral claim that is the basic idea behind the proposed law. This claim is based on the basic idea of ​​Christian charity, which is one of the foundations of German society.

Consequences of the law

There was no flood of lawsuits against which opponents of the law had warned after the General Equal Treatment Act came into force. It is true that the television magazine plusminus reported in February 2007 about a man who has so far sued more than 30 companies for alleged gender discrimination. However, unjustified unequal treatment on the grounds of gender was already prohibited by law before the General Equal Treatment Act came into force.

A first major lawsuit was initiated by an insurance employee who, supported by lawyers from the German Society for Anti-Discrimination Law, is demanding compensation of 500,000 euros from her employer, R + V Versicherung, due to clear gender discrimination and possible ethnic discrimination. In the first instance, the court awarded her a claim for compensation of 10,818 euros for the transfer of the employees and declared the transfer to be ineffective.

In 2008, the Hamm Regional Labor Court sentenced a cargo airline to compensation of 6,450 euros. The company had advertised a position as “flight captain” and had not considered the application from a female pilot. At the court hearing, the company was unable to refute the appearance of discrimination.

The Initiative Neue Soziale Marktwirtschaft (INSM) commissioned the study "Legal follow-up costs of the General Equal Treatment Act (AGG)" which came to the conclusion that the AGG had incurred costs of 1.73 billion euros for German companies. This study was reviewed by the Anti-Discrimination Agency through a commission convened. The commission members Birger Priddat and Heinrich Wilms come to the conclusion in their report “Benefits and costs of the General Equal Treatment Act (AGG)” that the feared wave of lawsuits did not materialize and the alleged glut of costs was based on a fiction.

European Union infringement proceedings

With the justification of inadequate implementation of the directives by the Federal Republic of Germany, the Commission has initiated the first steps in infringement proceedings. The Commission's complaints relate, among other things, to Article 2 (4), Article 8 (1) sentence 1, Article 9 (1), Article 10 sentence 2 No. 4 and Article 15 (1), 3 and 4 and Article 23 ( 1 ) . 1 sentence 2 AGG. At the end of 2010, the relevant infringement proceedings were closed.

Extension of the General Equal Treatment Act

At the European level, the expansion of anti-discrimination laws from the workplace to access to goods and services (such as housing rental) is under discussion.

So far, only Germany and the Czech Republic have opposed a consensus among the 27 countries. The argument against this consensus is based on the fact that discrimination can be countered much better at national level and that the planned expansion will lead to "overregulation".

International comparison

Just like the German General Equal Treatment Act, similar laws in the other EU countries are also based on the EC anti-discrimination directives and are therefore designed in a similar way, even if in some cases more extensive.

The United States has had a similar law since 1964, the Civil Rights Act . Right from the start, this banned discrimination based on race, skin color, religion, gender or origin; later age and disability were added. In the USA, the employer must ensure that there is no hostile work environment in which an employee is exposed to hostility, insults, humiliation, etc. on the part of his superiors or other employees. The employer is even required to point out the inadmissibility of such disadvantages in the context of vocational training. A complaint in court is made easier for the discriminated person because he only has to make credible the facts from which the discrimination arises. The defendant must then prove that there are objective and non-discriminatory reasons for the different treatment.

The UN has promulgated United Nations declarations and resolutions on sexual orientation and gender identity at the international level .

See also


  • Klaus Michael Alenfelder: Protection against discrimination in labor law. The new General Equal Treatment Act Deubner Verlag. 1st edition, Cologne 2006, ISBN 3-88606-622-3 .
  • Bauer, Göpfert, Krieger: General Equal Treatment Act. Comment. , 3rd edition, Munich 2011, Verlag CH Beck, ISBN 978-3-406-61752-2
  • Müthlein, Jaspers: AGG - Legally secure personnel processes and data processing. Guide for HR and data protection officers. Data context. 1st edition 2006, ISBN 3-89577-465-0 .
  • Frenzel, Hartmut: Implementation of the European Anti-Discrimination Guidelines in German Law - Examination of Efficiency Journal for European Social and Labor Law - ZESAR. 2010. ISSN  1868-7938 .
  • Christine Nollert-Borasio, Martina Perreng: General Equal Treatment Act. Basic commentary on the AGG . 3rd, revised edition. Bund-Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 2011, ISBN 978-3-7663-6001-4 .
  • Christian Oberwetter: General Equal Treatment Act (AGG). Comment. Verlag RS Schulz 2006. PDF file ( Memento from September 27, 2007 in the Internet Archive )
  • Dagmar Schiek (Ed.): General Equal Treatment Act (AGG) - A commentary from a European perspective. 1st edition 2006, ISBN 3-935808-70-4 .
  • Bernhard Steinkühler: General Equal Treatment Act (AGG). The implementation of the AGG in the company with recommendations for action in practice. Erich Schmidt Publishing House. Berlin 2007, ISBN 978-3-503-09782-1 .
  • Gregor Thüsing: Protection against discrimination under labor law. The new General Equal Treatment Act and other labor law prohibitions on discrimination. Publishing house CH Beck. Munich 2007.
  • Gerlind Wisskirchen: AGG. General equality law. 3. Edition. Datakontext 2007, ISBN 3-89577-469-3 .
  • Jörn-Axel Meyer, René Schleus, Evamaria Buchhop: The General Equal Treatment Act (AGG) in SMEs. Josef Eul Verlag, Lohmar 2007, ISBN 978-3-89936-607-5
  • Christian Wörl: The burden of proof under the General Equal Treatment Act. An examination of § 22 AGG , Nomos Verlag 2009, ISBN 978-3-8329-4291-5
  • Palandt -Ellenberger: Civil Code. Commentary on the BGB with subsidiary laws , here: Commentary on the AGG, 70th edition, Munich 2011, ISBN 978-3-406-61000-4
  • Aino Schleusener, Christian Suckow, Martin Plum: AGG. General equality law. Pocket comment . 5th edition. Luchterhand, 2019, ISBN 978-3-472-09534-7 (808 pages).

Broadcast reports

Web links

Legislative and directive texts, legislative procedures

Other web links

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Christian F. Majer : Race and ethnic origin in § 1 AGG. A definition . In: Law Studies & Exams . Issue 3, 2018, p. 124–127 ( [PDF]).
  2. Sibylle Raasch: The General Equal Treatment Act (AGG): in force since August 2006 ( memento of January 29, 2009 in the Internet Archive ), Deutscher Juristenbund Current Information 2007, Issue 1, p. 3
  3. Cisch / Böhm, The General Equal Treatment Act and Company Pension Plans in Germany, BB 2007, 602, 605 mwN and Schlachter in ErfK, § 2 AGG, Rn. 3, 15th edition, Munich 2015, ISBN 978-3-406-66728-2
  4. Press Release No. 29/13 - Termination due to leaving the Church on April 25, 2013
  5. Business consultant : Disregarding recruitment due to insufficient knowledge of German, no discrimination under the AGG. ArbG Berlin, judgment of September 26, 2007 - 14 Ca 10356/07 . Retrieved December 2, 2010 .
  6. ECJ: Judgment - Case C-45/09 - Gisela Rosenbladt / Oellerking Gebäudereinigungsges. mbH. (No longer available online.) October 12, 2010, archived from the original on August 15, 2010 ; Retrieved October 13, 2010 . Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot /
  7. ECJ: The automatic termination of the employment relationship when the employee reaches retirement age is not necessarily discriminatory. October 12, 2010, accessed on October 13, 2010 (Press Release No. 103/10. Judgment in Case C-45/09 - Gisela Rosenbladt / Oellerking Gebäudereinigungsges. MbH).
  8. Guide to the University of Göttingen ( Memento of the original from February 10, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot /
  9. Klaus Lützenkirchen: The General Equal Treatment Act in Tenancy Law , Association of North Rhine-Westphalian Real Estate Managers. V. (VNWI) - Unit Equal Treatment Act, Cologne ( PDF, p. 31 ).
  10. Erwin Salamon: Obstacles in the Discrimination Process - Facilitation of Evidence for the Alleged Victim and Limits , accessed on June 1, 2016.
  11. BAG, judgment of August 17, 2010 - 9 AZR 839/08
  12. ^ BAG, judgment of July 22, 2010 - 8 AZR 1012/08
  13. ↑ Draft law of the federal government on § 22 AGG, BT-Drucksache 16/1780 of June 8, 2006 , p. 47
  14. ^ Landesarbeitsgericht Schleswig-Holstein, judgment of April 9, 2014 - Az: 3 Sa 401/13
  15. ^ BAG, judgment of March 18, 2010, 8 AZR 1044/08
  16. BAG, judgment of August 19, 2010 - 8 AZR 530/09
  17. Assumption facts according to § 22 AGG - which indications are sufficient? IWW Institute, March 31, 2011
  18. Not yet final judgment of the Labor Court Osnabrück (3 Ca 677/06)
  19. BT-Drs. 15/4538
  20. cf. ECJ, judgment of July 11, 2006 , Az. C-13/05, case Navas, Chacón Navas; NJW 2006, 839.
  21. Federal Labor Court : judgment of November 6, 2008, Az. 2 AZR 523/07. Compulsory redundancy - age discrimination. Retrieved December 5, 2010 .
  22. ↑ In December 2006, the FDP parliamentary group submitted an inquiry about alleged abuse of the law. Major inquiry, Bundestag printed matter 16/3725 (PDF; 139 kB)
  23. See Die Welt : How fraud, paperwork and legal uncertainty are promoted by the state ; Issue of November 14, 2006
    Der Spiegel: Bizarre legal consequences ; Edition of November 13, 2006 (No. 46), p. 36
  24. ^ Judgment of the Potsdam Labor Court of July 13, 2005, 8 Ca 1150/05
  25. Henning Zander: Much ado about nothing. The new law has arrived in everyday life. But there are hardly any complaints in: Der Tagesspiegel, February 18, 2007
    Köppen draws a positive balance of the Equal Treatment Act - Federal Commissioner: There has been no wave of lawsuits , Daily Anzeiger, edition of August 13, 2007
  26. ↑ Plus minus: Discriminated companies - Trouble with the Equal Treatment Act ; Broadcast on ARD on February 27, 2007
  27. ^ Roland Preuß: Equal Treatment Act. Heavily pregnant with no livelihood. Sueddeutsche Zeitung , January 25, 2008, accessed December 5, 2010 .
  28. ^ Jana Schulze: Insurance group R + V. Pregnant women booted. Frankfurter Rundschau , October 30, 2008, accessed December 5, 2010 .
  29. r + v insurance | More democracy. Retrieved June 22, 2017 (German).
  30. ^ Judgment of the Hamm Regional Labor Court, Az. 9 Sa 2045/07.
  31. Andreas Hoffjan and Annehild Bramann: compliance costs of the General Equal Treatment Act (AGG). (No longer available online.) In: Betriebs-Beratung Year: 2007 Issue: 48. P. 2625 ff , formerly in the original ; Retrieved December 2, 2010 .  ( Page no longer available , search in web archives )@1@ 2Template: Toter Link /
  32. Companies are charged with 1.73 billion euros. Current INSM study on the anti-discrimination law. New Social Market Economy Initiative , February 16, 2009, accessed December 5, 2010 .
  33. Birger P. Priddat, Heinrich Wilms: Benefits and costs of the General Equal Treatment Act (AGG). (PDF) Part I, analysis and evaluation of the study “Legal Costs of the General Equal Treatment Act”. (No longer available online.) In: Series of publications by the Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency, Volume 3. Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency , November 2008, archived from the original on January 5, 2011 ; Retrieved December 5, 2010 .
  34. LSVD: End of the Lies ( Memento from November 2, 2011 in the Internet Archive )
  35. Tagesspiegel: Equality doesn't come dearly. Anti-Discrimination Agency - no wave of lawsuits
  36. The company: Anti-discrimination: Commission stops all infringement proceedings against Germany ( Memento of August 22, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
  37. EU: Resistance against equal rights,  ( page no longer available , search in web archivesInfo: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: dead link /  
  38. Articles and documents relating to the Civil Rights Act of 1964