Notice of termination (German labor law)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In German labor law, the declaration of termination is a unilateral declaration of intent that requires receipt , through which an employment relationship is to be terminated .

The term “termination” is often shortened to mean “declaration of termination”. If the expression “ declaration of termination” is used consciously, the question of whether and the effectiveness of the termination should be addressed as a declaration of intent .

Delimitations

A notice of termination must be distinguished from other forms of termination of the employment relationship . The difference consensual termination (z. B. termination agreement ) is obvious. The differentiation from unilateral forms of termination is sometimes more difficult. The revocation , the challenge or the resignation are to be considered .

In (German) labor law, a declaration of termination is to be distinguished from the mere exemption from the obligation to work and from the non-renewal notification (in the case of a temporary or terminated employment relationship). The notice of termination must be distinguished from the actual (usually later) termination of the employment relationship. The European Court of Justice has stipulated that “dismissal” in Section 17 (1) of the Protection against Dismissal Act (KSchG) should be understood as a declaration of termination.

A notice of termination is different from invoking the disruption of the business basis ( Section 313 of the German Civil Code). In (German) labor law, § 313 BGB regarding the termination of employment relationships is superseded by the dismissal protection regulations.

The whether a notice of termination

In the event of termination, the terminating party must declare that he wants to end the contractual relationship unilaterally with his declaration. The word “termination” need not be mentioned. What the declarer wants can also be determined through interpretation . "It is crucial that the terminating party clearly states his will to want to unilaterally dissolve the employment relationship ... When interpreting, it is not only the wording that must be used, but all circumstances that have to be taken into account when it comes to the question of what will the person making the declaration Made his declaration, could be of importance and was known to the recipient of the declaration. ”“ A termination must be clearly and unequivocally declared ”.

In case of doubt, the following examples from labor law can be transferred to other areas of law:

  • The notification by the employer that the employee has stopped work at a certain point in time and that he therefore considers the employment relationship to be terminated at that point in time does not imply any notice of termination by the employer.
  • The notification by the employer to the employee hired for a limited period or with a dissolving contract that his employment relationship will end at a certain point in time is not a declaration of termination.
  • The threat of termination is not yet a declaration of termination.
  • The confirmation of a termination can be an independent declaration of termination.
    • If the employer confirms that an employee has allegedly given notice of termination, this usually does not mean that the employer has dismissed himself.
    • If the employer confirms in writing a previously orally declared termination, this should generally not be a separate declaration of termination. But this is a question of the individual case. The confirmation can contain a further precautionary notice of termination - necessary with regard to the written form requirement.
  • If the employer certifies in the certificate issued later for the employment agency that the employment relationship ended when the employee gave notice, this also does not constitute a notice of termination.
  • The mere indication that a written notice of termination has been sent is usually not an independent termination.

There is often a dispute about whether a notice of termination was given orally.

Example : There is an exchange of words between an employee and an employer. The employee says “I'm going” and leaves the company.
a) He packs all his things and goes with them.
b) He leaves his things in the office
c) etc.

If there is a legal requirement to have a written form, these questions can often be left open: any self-resignation would in any case have no formal requirements.

However, a written form requirement does not solve all problems of interpretation.

Example : The employer claims that the employee has given notice of resignation. Although this was ineffective, the employee had no longer offered his work and could therefore not demand any remuneration for the period after the ineffective self-resignation. In unclear cases, the employee is therefore well advised to show his willingness to work as soon as possible and to make the employer a proper job offer so that he has a right to default in acceptance in the event of continued employment.

Types of termination

In German law, different types and types of dismissals are distinguished. There may be different typologies or terminologies in the individual areas of law.

Extraordinary termination - ordinary termination

A distinction is made between extraordinary dismissals and ordinary dismissals.

Extraordinary termination is often defined as termination without notice, and ordinary termination as termination for a limited period. A temporary termination is a termination that is only to become effective after a period of notice ("notice period") has expired.

However, this is only the case as a rule. Conceptually, this is wrong and dangerous.

The distinction between extraordinary and ordinary termination is different from that between termination without notice and for a fixed term: extraordinary termination is usually given, but not necessarily without notice. It can also be pronounced as an extraordinary termination “with a social exclusion period”. In the case of an employee who cannot be dismissed properly, only extraordinary dismissal is permitted. This may take place without notice in the event of theft. In the event of an illness, it must be regularly given while observing a “social period of grace”. H. in compliance with a period of time that would have to be observed if an ordinary termination was issued.

It might be more correct to define extraordinary termination as a termination in which the terminating party invokes an important reason and wants to make recognizable claims that exist for an important reason. (Even if there is an important reason (e.g. theft), the employer can also properly terminate a thief.) An important reason does not need to be objective. The terminating party only needs to be aware of one important reason (example: the employer terminates the innocent thief A instead of the thief B.). An extraordinary termination is a termination for an alleged important reason as an important reason. In this sense, an extraordinary and shorter term is usually a termination without notice for an important reason.

Correspondingly, an ordinary termination is not a temporary termination, but rather a termination that is not recognizable for an important reason as an important reason. An extraordinary termination does not become a proper termination. that it is temporary. A termination does not become extraordinary because it occurs during the probationary period and the notice period is very short.

Unclear terminology is dangerous for the person giving notice if he is only allowed a certain type of notice and if the name is wrong, the notice may be ineffective for this reason alone.

Ordinary termination is the rule, extraordinary termination is the exception. If someone wants to terminate his contract partner extraordinarily, he must make this clear to him. Otherwise he only declares the termination as ordinary. The type of termination can also result from the circumstances. The word "without notice" is sufficient to indicate an extraordinary termination. If it remains unclear which type of termination was chosen, the notice of termination can only be interpreted as an ordinary one. Especially in the case of extraordinary termination with a social preclusive period, it must be clear that the termination should be declared as extraordinary.

Other types of dismissals in labor law

In labor law there are certain other types of dismissals.

Termination Notice - Change Notice

In German labor law, a distinction is made between a termination notice and a change notice. For ordinary terminations that are subject to the KSchG, the termination notice is regulated in § 1 KSchG, the change notice in § 2 KSchG.

A termination notice is aimed at a permanent termination of the employment relationship. A termination notice is - at least externally - primarily aimed at a continuation of the employment relationship with a change in the working conditions. For this purpose, a notice of termination is given to the employee and at the same time the offer to continue the employment relationship under changed working conditions is made. A change termination is - according to the prevailing opinion - acc. § 2 sentence 1 KSchG is a legal transaction composed of two declarations of intent. The second element of termination is the offer to continue the employment relationship under changed conditions.

See also: Change notice .

Operational - behavioral - personal termination

The KSchG requires in its area of ​​application for the effectiveness of ordinary dismissals a “social justification” ( § 1 Abs. 1 KSchG). According to Section 1 (2) sentence 1 KSchG, a dismissal is socially unjustified "if it is not conditioned by reasons relating to the person or behavior of the employee, or urgent operational requirements that prevent the employee from continuing to work". Based on this, one speaks of a personal, behavioral or operational dismissal.

Termination of printing

One speaks of a pressure termination when third parties (colleagues, customers, media, etc.) demand the dismissal of an employee under threat of disadvantages for the employer. A distinction is made between a “false print termination” and a “real print termination”.

A false print termination is a (supposedly) objectively justified termination for personal or behavioral reasons , which the employer expresses in response to pressure from third parties. Their effectiveness depends, among other things, on the objective existence of a personal or behavior-related reason for termination.

A real termination is given if there is no objective justification for the threat, but the employer gives in to the pressure due to the threatened disadvantages. This is then treated as a possible special case of an operational dismissal.

Resignation

One speaks of "self-resignation" when the employee resigns himself. This can be done in the form of an ordinary or extraordinary termination, i. H. in compliance with the normal notice period or without notice. There is also a written form requirement for self-termination (see above). Unjustified termination without notice can lead to claims for damages by the employer. However, these are usually difficult to enforce. In the case of a justified termination without notice (for example because the employer is not insignificantly in arrears with the payment of the wages and salaries despite a (verifiable) reminder), the employee can have claims for damages against the employer according to § 628 BGB.

A resignation once pronounced is irrevocable. A voluntary resignation is ineffective if the employee is not in saying the Declaration legal capacity was, or fails to comply with the written form. Extraordinary self-termination if there was no important reason within the meaning of § 626 Paragraph 1 BGB. In practice, the challenge is in the foreground: the employer threatens something to induce the employee to resign himself. In the event of an unlawful threat, resignation is contestable , i. H. can be eliminated by means of a notice of objection with a time limit.

In procedural terms, the ineffectiveness of a self-resignation must and cannot be asserted through a dismissal protection action with a time limit according to § 4 KSchG, but through a "general application for determination" according to § 256 ZPO. This time up to the limit of the process implementation.

If the employee does not "already have something else", the statement of self-resignation in case of doubt leads to the imposition of a blocking period by the Federal Employment Agency . You should therefore always seek legal advice before resigning yourself.

Termination due to illness

A termination due to illness is a termination due to an illness, more precisely because of the expected future burdens on the employment relationship due to further future illness-related burdens, in particular periods of incapacity for work. Ordinary termination due to illness is the main case of personal termination i. S. d. Section 1 (2) sentence 1 KSchG.

Mass layoffs ("mass layoffs")

A mass termination is a termination within the framework of "notifiable dismissals" in accordance with §§ 17 ff. KSchG.

Termination of probation

A termination of the probationary period is technically a termination within the “probationary period” of an employee. More precisely, it is a termination during the six-month waiting period in accordance with Section 1 (1) KSchG. More precisely and in the technical sense, it is an ordinary termination during the waiting period of Section 1 (1) KSchG, for which a shortened probationary notice period applies.

Partial termination

Partial termination is a declaration of intent with which the terminating party wants to unilaterally change individual contractual conditions against the will of the other contracting party. Partial termination differs from termination in that the termination covers the entire employment relationship, while partial termination is only intended to remove individual rights and obligations from the employment relationship while maintaining the employment relationship.

Partial termination is generally not permitted. An agreed right to partial termination can, in individual cases, be viewed as an agreement of the right to cancel or make changes. This can - among other things - be ineffective according to § 307 Paragraph 1 Clause 1 BGB (inappropriate clause).

Suspicion of termination

One speaks of a suspected dismissal if a dismissal takes place on the basis of the mere suspicion and not (only) on the basis of the existence of the act of a breach of duty. It is considered a special case of a behavior-related termination and has specific effectiveness requirements.

Repeated resignation, resignation

A repeated termination is only given if a further termination is issued for the same reasons before the legally binding determination of the ineffectiveness of a termination.

A repeated termination in this sense is ineffective due to the precedence of the previous decision.

Effectiveness of a notice of termination as a declaration of intent

This is only about the ineffectiveness of a termination as a notice of termination, i.e. H. as a declaration of intent . These also apply if there is no general or special protection against dismissal. So you have to pay attention to every termination. The focus is on the effectiveness of an employer termination.

For other reasons of ineffectiveness:

If there is a notice of termination at all (see above), the effectiveness of an employer termination must be challenged in court within a period of 3 weeks ( §§ 4, 13 KSchG) , even if there is no general or special protection against dismissal . Otherwise, the effectiveness of the termination is fictitious with regard to most of the reasons for ineffectiveness.

Termination by a non- (longer) employer

Only the contract employer is authorized to terminate the contract. A third party who is not, or is no longer an employer, cannot effectively terminate the contract in his or her own name.

  • Example: Through a transfer of business , an employment relationship is legally transferred to the purchaser if the employee does not object ( § 613a BGB). If the previous employer does not terminate the contract until after the transfer of operations has already taken place, the termination will be ineffective.

Receipt of termination (Section 130 BGB)

The termination is a declaration of intent that needs to be received and, in accordance with Section 130 BGB, requires access to be effective.

Compliance with the written form (§ 623 BGB)

The termination of employment by a notice on the part of the employer or the employee requires the statutory written form within the meaning of § 126 BGB. The electronic form i. S. d. § 126a BGB is excluded ( § 623 last Hs. BGB). Failure to comply with the written form will render the termination invalid ( Section 125 BGB).

Written statement of reasons (§ 22 Abs. 3 BBiG, § 9 MuSchG)

(Only) In the special cases of termination of a trainee ( Section 22 Paragraph 3 BBiG) and in the case of termination by a pregnant woman or young mother ( Section 17 Paragraph 2 Sentence 2 MuSchG), a written justification of the reason for termination is required by law.

Conditional hostility of the notice of termination

Resignations are unconditional. Conditional terminations are ineffective. Legal conditions are excluded:

  • Termination declared "as an alternative" or "as a precaution":
"An" alternative "or" precautionary "notice also expresses the employer's will to terminate the employment relationship. The addition of" alternative "or" precautionary "only makes it clear that the employer is primarily referring to another termination fact, the legal effects of which he does not want to forego .... The "alternative" or "precautionary" declaration of termination is subject to a - permissible ... - dissolving legal condition within the meaning of Section 158 (2) of the German Civil Code (BGB) Employment relationship has already been terminated at an earlier point in time ".
  • "in the event of a transfer of business":
Accordingly, a termination "in the event that there is no transfer of business" as a precautionary termination or as an expression of a legal condition is "unproblematic".

Determination of the notice of termination

A declaration of termination "must be defined as a declaration of intent that needs to be received so that the recipient receives clarity about the intentions of the party giving notice." This applies in particular to the question of what the termination is to be declared as (type of termination) and when it should be terminated (notice period and notice date). Whether a notice of termination is sufficiently determined is to be determined through interpretation. "When interpreting a declaration of intent, the wording is not the sole criterion. All the accompanying circumstances that were known to the recipient of the declaration and that may be relevant to the question of what will the declarer had when the declaration was made must be appreciated." The circumstances at the time of receipt of the notice of termination are decisive.

Termination Date

"The requirement of the certainty of an ordinary termination does not require the terminating party to expressly state the termination date as a specific calendar date. It is sufficient if the intended termination date can be unequivocally determined for the recipient of the termination."

Termination at the "next possible date"

The BAG makes different demands on the recognizability of the desired termination date. If it is an "isolated" ordinary termination, the termination date must be ascertainable for the recipient "without difficulty". If an ordinary termination takes place as a precautionary measure together with an extraordinary termination without notice, this requirement does not apply:

isolated ordinary termination:
"A termination" at the next admissible date "is sufficiently determined if the recipient of the declaration knows or can determine the duration of the notice period (....). It is typically to be understood as meaning that the terminating party terminates the employment relationship at the time which results in the application of the relevant statutory, collective bargaining and / or contractual provisions as the legally earliest possible termination date (...). The termination date desired by the declaring party can thus be clearly determined objectively. This is sufficient if the legally applicable deadline is easily ascertainable for the termination addressee and does not require comprehensive actual investigations or the answering of difficult legal questions "
precautionary ordinary termination i. V. m. a termination without notice:
The notice period for an ordinary termination does not have to be recognizable "without difficulty" for the recipient of the termination (i.e. usually for the employee) if the ordinary termination is pronounced together with an extraordinary termination in the event that the extraordinary termination is ineffective.
Alternative termination dates
"A termination is not sufficiently determined if several dates for the termination of the employment relationship are mentioned in the declaration and it is not clear to the recipient of the declaration which date should apply"

Termination type

The terminating party must make it clear whether he wants to issue an extraordinary or ordinary termination. If it is not evident that a termination should be pronounced as extraordinary termination, ordinary termination is to be assumed. In practice, there is sometimes confusion because there are also the special forms of "ordinary termination without notice" and "extraordinary termination with a social expiry period (i.e. usually with an ordinary notice period)" and the latter in particular is not an ordinary termination.

Representation

Representation occurs when a third party tries to terminate the contract on behalf of the employer. The following reasons for ineffectiveness can arise:

(1) acting on behalf of someone else is for a wrong person who is not an employer;
(2) the termination takes place without power of representation ( § 180 sentence 1 BGB) and is also not approved retrospectively ( § 177 BGB);
(3) The termination takes place without power of representation and if the termination is rejected immediately due to a lack of power of attorney, approval is no longer permitted (Section 180 sentence 2 BGB);
(4) The termination takes place without presentation of the power of attorney and also without notification of the power of attorney and the termination is rejected immediately because the power of attorney is not presented ( Section 174 BGB). The termination is then ineffective, even if a power of attorney was present when the termination was issued, and subsequent approval is no longer possible.

No action on behalf of the person entitled to terminate

A notice of termination on behalf of the employer is ineffective if this is not clear to the employee:

  • Example: The employee works for a group company A. The notice is given by group company B. Company B can resign as a representative of company B on its behalf. However, if this is not clear and company B terminates “in its own name”, a non-employer has terminated the contract.

Rejection of termination due to lack of power of representation (Section 180 sentence 2 BGB)

In the case of termination as a unilateral legal transaction, representation without power of representation is not permitted under Section 180 sentence 1 BGB . However, according to § 180 sentence 2 BGB, this does not apply if the recipient of the declaration complained about the lack of power of representation when the termination was issued or agreed to representation without power of representation. If no complaint is made, the provisions on contracts apply accordingly in accordance with § 180 sentence 2 BGB. That means u. a. that the legal transaction can be approved in accordance with Section 177 (1) BGB. In the case of Section 180 Sentence 2 and Section 177 Paragraph 1 of the German Civil Code (BGB), the notice of termination is pendingly invalid and can be approved.

The complaint according to § 180 sentence 2 BGB is something different than the complaint of the lack of submission of a missing power of attorney according to § 174 BGB. What is objected to or criticized must be made sufficiently clear. The complaint must be made immediately ( § 121 BGB).

Approval can also be given implicitly. For example, by the fact that the employer claims the person giving notice to terminate in the dismissal protection process.

In principle, an approval has retroactive effect ( Section 184 (1) BGB). In the event of extraordinary termination in accordance with Section 626 Paragraph 1 BGB, approval is only effective within the two-week preclusive period of Section 626 Paragraph 2 BGB.

Rejection of termination due to failure to present a power of attorney (Section 174 BGB)

If a termination is declared by a legal representative (opposite: organ representative , e.g. GmbH managing director) and his power of representation is not expressly or according to the circumstances (e.g. due to the position) "implied" in the sense of § 174 sentence 2 BGB, the notice of termination is ineffective if the notice of termination is rejected "for this reason" (!) " Immediately ".

Notice periods

The notice period is the time between the receipt of a notice of termination and the date of termination of the employment relationship. A distinction must be made between the subjectively intended notice period and the objectively applicable notice period.

“The termination of the employment relationship usually forces the employee to look for a new job and to adjust to new working conditions. Whether he finds a new job with the same earnings and conditions, if possible, also depends on how much time he has to look for a job. The notice periods should take this into account and facilitate the transition to a new position ”.

A proper notice must comply with the minimum statutory notice periods and, if the collective agreement or employment contract notice periods.

As a rule, an incorrectly chosen notice period or the failure to specify a notice period (“I am giving notice!”) Only means that an otherwise effective, ordinary notice of termination becomes effective on the correct, next possible notice date.

The extraordinary termination without notice ( § 626 BGB) is a termination for good cause that is given without observing a notice period. A special form is extraordinary dismissal with a social expiry period (which as a rule must correspond to the regular notice period) for properly non-dismissable employees in the case of personal or operational important reasons. Example: The employee cannot be terminated according to the collective agreement, but is permanently ill. It can - under the conditions of a termination due to illness - be extraordinarily terminated with a social expiry period.

Procedural matters

Kind of action

Without a special statutory regulation, the ineffectiveness of a notice of termination must be asserted through a general declaratory action . In labor law there is a special regulation according to § 4 KSchG. According to § 4 sentence 1 KSchG, in the case of a termination notice, an application must be made that the employment relationship has not been terminated by the specific termination. The dismissal protection suit thus has a so-called punctual subject matter of dispute , which differs from the subject matter of a general declaratory action. The application for a change in termination is regulated in § 4 sentence 2 KSchG. A dismissal protection suit has the conclusiveness condition that the employer has declared a dismissal at all. If the employee erroneously assumes a dismissal, he loses the dismissal protection suit. In cases of doubt - or if there is certainly no notice of termination, but the employer claims one, at least as a precaution a general declaratory action to determine the continued existence of the contract must be filed. Then the employer must acknowledge this or cite a specific termination.

Burden of presentation and proof

According to general principles, the burden of presentation and proof is borne by the person who invokes the existence or effectiveness of a notice of termination as a favorable fact.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ BAG, judgment of September 20, 2006 - 6 AZR 82/06 - NZA 2007, 377 (378)
  2. ↑ BAG, judgment of March 15, 1991 - 2 AZR 516/90 - juris Rn. 24 = NZA 1992, 452
  3. ↑ Regional Labor Court Nuremberg, judgment of February 8, 1994 - 2 Sa 766/93 -, juris
  4. ^ LAG Cologne, judgment of December 7, 1995 - 5 Sa 1035/95 - juris, Ls.
  5. ^ So LAG Cologne, judgment of March 20, 2006 - 14 (4) Sa 36/06 - NZA-RR 2006, 642 Ls.
  6. ↑ LAG Cologne [20. March 2006] - 14 (4) Sa 36/06 - NZA-RR 2006, 642 Ls.
  7. ↑ BAG, judgment of February 18, 1997 - EzA § 130 BGB No. 8
  8. ↑ See BAG, judgment of October 27, 2005 - 6 AZR 27/05 - NZA 2006, 808 Os. = NJOZ 2006, 2540 = juris, Rn. 15th
  9. ↑ See BAG, judgment of October 27, 2005 - 6 AZR 27/05 - juris Rn. 15 = NJOZ 2006, 2540
  10. ↑ Lingemann, Protection against dismissal, 2011, part 2, marginal no. 22nd
  11. ^ LAG Cologne, judgment of October 6, 2005 - 6 Sa 843/05 - NZA-RR 2006, 353 Ls.
  12. ↑ Lingemann, Protection against dismissal, 2011, part 2, marginal no. 22nd
  13. ↑ See BAG, judgment of April 21, 2005 - 2 AZR 132/04 - NZA 2005, 1289 (1290)
  14. ↑ So BAG, judgment of June 19, 1986 - 2 AZR 563/85 = AP No. 33 to § 1 KSchG operational dismissal, to B II 2 a of the reasons
  15. ↑ See for example BAG of 09/21/2017 - 2 AZR 57/17 - Schizophrenia
  16. ↑ BAG of 21.09.2017 - 2 AZR 57/17
  17. ↑ So BAG, judgment of January 22, 1997 - 5 AZR 658/95 = NZA 1997, 711 (712)
  18. ↑ BAG, judgment of February 25, 2004 - 2 AZR 399/03 - NZA 2004, 1216 (1218)
  19. ↑ BAG, judgment of April 10, 2014 - 2 AZR 647/13 - juris Rn. 12 = NZA 2015, 162 = NJW 2014, 3533; BAG, judgment of 23.05.2013 - 2 AZR 54/12 - juris Rn. 44 = NZA 2013, 1197
  20. ↑ BAG, judgment of September 18, 2014 - 8 AZR 733/13 - juris Rn. 34 = NZA 2015, 97
  21. ↑ BAG, judgment of April 10, 2014 - 2 AZR 647/13 - Rn. 14 = NZA 2015, 162 = NJW 2014, 3533 [1]
  22. ↑ BAG, judgment of April 10, 2014 - 2 AZR 647/13 - Rn. 15 = NZA 2015, 162 = NJW 2014, 3533 [2]
  23. ↑ BAG, judgment of April 10, 2014 - 2 AZR 647/13 - Rn. 14 = NZA 2015, 162 = NJW 2014, 3533 [3]
  24. ↑ BAG, judgment of April 10, 2014 - 2 AZR 647/13 - Rn. 16 = NZA 2015, 162 = NJW 2014, 3533 [4]
  25. ↑ BAG, judgment of April 10, 2014 - 2 AZR 647/13 - Rn. 17 = NZA 2015, 162 = NJW 2014, 3533 [5]
  26. ↑ BAG from January 20, 2016 - 6 AZR 782/14 = NJW 2016, 1117 = NZA 2016, 485 = AP No. 72 to § 622 BGB = EzA § 622 BGB 2002 No. 13; BAG of October 22, 2015 - 2 AZR 381/14 = NZA 2016, 482 = EzA § 626 BGB 2002 non-cancellability no.25
  27. ↑ BAG, judgment of April 10, 2014 - 2 AZR 647/13 - Rn. 18 = NZA 2015, 162 = NJW 2014, 3533 [6]
  28. ↑ BAG December 16, 2010 - 2 AZR 485/08 - Rn. 13
  29. ↑ BAG, judgment of April 10, 2014 - 2 AZR 684/13 - juris Rn. 32 = NZA 2014, 1197
  30. ↑ Regional Labor Court Nuremberg, judgment of March 15, 2004 - 9 (5) Sa 841/02 - juris Rn. 32
  31. ↑ BAG, judgment of April 10, 2014 - 2 AZR 684/13 - juris Rn. 33 = NZA 2014, 1197; BAG, judgment of April 25, 2013 - 6 AZR 49/12 - juris Rn. 128 = AP No. 1 to Section 343 InsO
  32. ↑ BAG, judgment of March 26, 1986 - 7 AZR 585/84 - NJW 1987, 1038; BAG, judgment of 04.02.1987 - 7 AZR 583/85 - Rn. 35 = AP No. 24 to § 626 BGB cut-off period; Nuremberg LAG, judgment of March 15, 2004 - 9 (5) Sa 841/02 - juris Rn. 33 = ZTR 2004, 492 Ls.
  33. ↑ BAG, judgment of 16.12.2004 - 6 AZR 127/04 - NZA 2005, 578 (579 f.)