Nils-Johannes Kratzer

Nils-Johannes Kratzer (* 1973) is a German specialist lawyer for labor law and criminal defense lawyer . He gained notoriety through numerous court cases that he is conducting on his own account for alleged violations of the General Equal Treatment Act (AGG) . In the foreground are claims for compensation that allegedly discriminate against Kratzers in the application process. Spiegel Online therefore called it the most famous “AGG hopper” in the republic. Kratzer denies running the compensation processes as a source of income. Rather, he seriously applies for the advertised positions and is actually discriminated against. In addition, a "legal political interest" moves him. He told Spiegel Online that he didn't want to live in a country where you couldn't find a job at 50.

Life

In 2001, Kratzer passed his second state law examination in Munich. From 2003 to 2005 he worked as an independent lawyer. In 2006 and 2007 he worked as a senior executive at an insurance company. In 2008, Kratzer studied in South Africa, where he obtained a Master of Laws .

Lawsuit against R + V Versicherung

In 2009 Kratzer returned to Germany and applied intensively to various companies, including R + V Versicherung in Wiesbaden. R + V Versicherung had advertised several trainee positions; in the job advertisement she consciously addressed university graduates. Kratzer received a rejection of his application. He then made a claim for compensation of € 14,000 against R + V for alleged age discrimination. When Kratzer learned that the trainee positions had been filled with female applicants without exception, he asked for an additional € 3,500 for alleged gender discrimination.

R + V rejected Kratzer's demands. This led to a multi-instance legal battle lasting several years. The Wiesbaden Labor Court and the Hessen State Labor Court initially dismissed Kratzer's complaint. Kratzer appealed for revision. In 2017 the Federal Labor Court (BAG) overturned the decisions of the lower courts and referred the case back to the State Labor Court of Hesse. In 2018, the regional labor court partially upheld Kratzer's lawsuit and sentenced R + V to pay compensation of € 14,000 plus interest of a good € 6,000. The judgment is final.

More legal proceedings

At the same time as the proceedings against R + V, Kratzer also litigated the Charité in 2009 . The clinic had also advertised trainee positions and did not take scratches into account when filling positions. The Berlin Labor Court and the Berlin-Brandenburg Regional Labor Court rejected Kratzer's action for compensation, and the Federal Labor Court overturned these judgments. In contrast to the previous instances, the BAG recognized evidence that suggested that Kratzer was inadmissible because of his age.

In 2010, Kratzer sued the Munich nightclub Café am Hochhaus . There he had been rejected by the doorman because - allegedly only temporarily - no further male guests were wanted that evening. Kratzer therefore saw himself discriminated against because of his gender. The process ended in a settlement . In this settlement, the Cafe am Hochhaus undertook not to discriminate against guests because of their gender in the future and to make a one-off payment to a non-profit organization.

In 2014, Kratzer failed with a lawsuit before the Hamburg Labor Court . His client applied to a language school, but did not receive the advertised position. Attorney Kratzer did not get through with the argument that his client had been disadvantaged because of his "ethnic affiliation" as a Bavarian. The lawsuit was dismissed.

In proceedings before the Nuremberg Regional Labor Court, he sought a fundamental decision on the question of the extent to which the Bavarians or the Franks are an ethnic group within the meaning of the General Equal Treatment Act.

In 2018, the Federal Labor Court decided in the final instance on a lawsuit that Kratzer had brought against a provider of diaconal work in 2012 . Kratzer had demanded compensation because the diaconal institution had discriminated against him in the application process on the grounds of religion and age. The BAG did not uphold the lawsuit for reasons of abuse of law . Kratzer did not apply to receive the advertised position. Rather, his application was solely about obtaining the formal status of an applicant and then claiming compensation.

Criminal proceedings

In 2015 the Munich public prosecutor charged Kratzer with commercial fraud . The allegation was that Kratzer had submitted bogus applications in more than 100 cases in order to then induce potential employers to pay compensation for alleged discrimination. He received a total of € 80,000. The District Court of Munich I refused to open criminal proceedings. The public prosecutor appealed against this decision. The Munich Higher Regional Court partially upheld the complaint and admitted the indictment relating to 35 individual allegations. The main hearing began on November 27, 2018 before the 12th criminal chamber of the Munich District Court I. A judgment was not initially expected before autumn 2019. After a total of 63 main trial days, the first instance judgment was finally passed on July 6, 2020, according to which Kratzer was sentenced to a year and four months' imprisonment. The judgment is not final; Kratzer has appealed to the Federal Court of Justice.

literature

• Dietmar Hipp: Stupid and clumsy . In: Der Spiegel . No. 5 , January 28, 2013, p. 45 ( spiegel.de [PDF; 67 kB ; accessed on April 4, 2019]).
• Elke Spanner, Petra Störmann: Dangerous applicants . In: The time . No. 15 , April 5, 2019, p. 12 .

Individual evidence

1. ↑ Elke Spanner: Controversial applicant lawyer - first the rejection, then the process. Spiegel Online, November 13, 2015, accessed November 16, 2018 . 
2. ↑ Dietmar Hipp: Dumb and clumsy. Der Spiegel, January 28, 2013, accessed November 16, 2018 . 
3. ↑ Elke Spanner: Controversial applicant lawyer - first the rejection, then the process. Spiegel online, November 13, 2015, accessed April 9, 2019 . 
4. ↑ European Court of Justice: Judgment in Case C ‑ 423/15 of July 28, 2016. Retrieved on November 16, 2018 . 
5. ↑ Tanja Podolski: LAG Hessen condemns R + V Versicherung: 14,000 euros compensation for alleged AGG hoppers. Legal Tribune Online, November 13, 2018, accessed November 16, 2018 . 
6. ^ Christian Rolfs: AGG - judgment in the matter of Nils Kratzer ./. R + V insurance legally binding. beck-blog, December 27, 2018, accessed on January 9, 2019 . 
7. ^ Federal Labor Court: Judgment of January 24, 2013, 8 AZR 429/11. Retrieved November 16, 2018 . 
8. ^ Sarah List, Peter T. Schmidt: Rejected in front of the bar - lawyer sues. Merkur.de, March 3, 2010, accessed November 16, 2018 . 
9. ↑ Karl Gaulhofer: Man's dignity can be touched - for bouncers. Die Presse, October 19, 2013, accessed on November 16, 2018 . 
10. ↑ Joachim Jahn: Abuse of the AGG - Discriminated because I'm Bavarian! FAZ, June 5, 2013, accessed on November 16, 2018 . 
11. ↑ Tanja Podolski: "I would have really liked to have made some money". Legal Tribune Online, April 9, 2019, accessed April 9, 2019 . 
12. ↑ Federal Labor Court: judgment of October 25, 2018, 8 AZR 562/16. Retrieved April 19, 2019 . 
13. ↑ Christian Rath: No lawsuit against AGG hoppers - bogus applications for discriminatory advertisements are not fraud. taz, December 18, 2015, accessed November 16, 2018 . 
14. ↑ Christian Rath: Sham application as abuse of law - only those who seriously apply for a position may invoke anti-discrimination law. taz, July 29, 2016, accessed November 17, 2018 . 
15. ↑ A Munich lawyer cashes heavily with AGG hopping, but is prosecuted. Haufe.de, November 18, 2018, accessed December 10, 2018 . 
16. ↑ Elke Spanner, Petra Störmann: Dangerous applicants . In: The time . No. 15 , April 5, 2019, p. 12 .
17. ↑ Regional Court Munich I, judgment of 6 July 2020, Az. 12 KLs 231 Js 139171/12.
18. ↑ Tanja Podolski: LG Munich I sentenced Munich lawyer - suspended sentence for "AGG-Hopper". Legal Tribune Online, July 17, 2020, accessed July 18, 2020 .