Examinations can be relevant to discrimination has recently become known, are candidates of the carmaker Daimler, the media giant Axel Springer and even public law broadcasters against a possible setting by means of blood tests on the heart and kidneys”checked. And flat, i.e. Read more here: Marko Dimitrijevic. even if no specific health fitness is required for the job in question. Apart from moral concerns such an approach in the context of the General equal treatment Act (AGG) for employers can be costly”, warns lawyer Stephanie Musiol by the law firm of Baker.REIMANN.STARI in Berlin. A recruitment examination which is not required by law or necessary to protect of others, needs to be justified, in the legitimate interest of the employer. High hurdles are to put on the necessity of a blood test”, explains lawyer Musiol. Because such massive attacks in the personality right and the physical integrity of an applicant’s one.” The same principles as in the question right of the employer apply here after an illness or (heavy) disability.
Stating that the employer itself not ask, he shouldn’t even on a detour”about doctors or experts can explore. After a blood test, which should provide information on the State of health of the employee, is allowed only if an any illness or disability would make it impossible the contractual performance on time, or at regularly recurring intervals. One such reason is likely not available however regularly at flat-rate blood tests”, so Musiol. “At first glance the question not affected after the health state the scope of application of the AGG, because here in that regard alone the feature disability” is relevant to discrimination. The distinction between disability and disease in some cases is difficult, according to lawyer Musiol however: chronic diseases can the term to understand the Disability under fall”.
The legal consequences of a breach of the AGG in the non-recruitment of a candidate be practically relevant. The case law allowed to lie the workers on an illegal question, this is apparently not possible with a blood test. The applicant can refuse consent of course. What regularly but might mean losing all employment opportunities. But, for example, a chronically ill applicants will receive, after he has undergone a cancellation, the required blood test, which is sufficient for presenting a disadvantage after the AGG”warns Musiol. Then, the employer must prove that other reasons refusal is due. This is likely difficult in particular then, if the choice is already made and setting dependent on only the test results”. Although the AGG provides no adjustment claim, but a claim of a worker. The special feature here is that the candidate is also a claim for damages Assert can, if he would not have been set even when discrimination-free selection. To make these risks out of the way, if employers make only examinations therefore pending clarification by the courts, when this is absolutely necessary for the pursuit of activities “, recommends lawyer Malappuram, in all other cases a disadvantage could indicated this, which entail the risk of a claim”. Answer technical questions: lawyer Stephanie Musiol, LL.M lawyer Glenn Dammann – lawyer specializing in labour law – BETHGE.REIMANN.STARI lawyers Kurfurstendamm 67 10707 Berlin Tel + 49 (0) 30 89 04 92 – 15 fax + 49 (0) 30 89 04 92 – 10
Auer Witte Thiel informed: tenant is in default of payment, work also ordinary termination Munich July 2013: neither Article 573, paragraph 2 No. 1 BGB 569 ABS. 3 BGB No. 3 are on an ordinary termination due to default of payment applicable. The Federal Supreme Court in a ruling made it clear. The firm Auer Witte Thiel informs about the backgrounds of the judges decision and explains what the verdict for landlords.
According to the German Federal Supreme Court, other rules apply to an ordinary termination due to default in payment, as for extraordinary dismissal for the same reason. So refers to 543 paragraph 2, sentence 1, no. 3 BGB, which as a precondition a minimum Mietruckstand of two month’s rent or a default period of two months in a row provides alone on extraordinary cancellations. May be below this threshold value, however, in an ordinary termination, refers to the judgment of the Federal Court by the 10th of October 2012 (AZ. Auer Witte Thiel VIII ZR 107/12). Federal Court judges: legal requirements for extraordinary termination, with neat not to his judgment came the Federal Supreme Court in a case in which a tenant first had fallen due to non-payment or incomplete payment of the advances of its heating costs in default. His landlady announced him so punctually.
After he legally had been sentenced to payment of the receivable and finally paid them, the tenant with the current monthly rent fell into arrears. Then, the landlady announced again on time. The tenant went into revision, so that finally the Bundesgerichtshof concerned with the case, so Auer Witte Thiel. In his decision dated the 10th of October 2012 (AZ. VIII 107/12) the Supreme Court came to the following conclusion: an ordinary termination section 569, paragraph 3 is not applicable No. 3 BGB. Therefore the lessor have wait also not two months until the final condemnation of the tenant on the 15.11.10 with their termination. The lease was effectively ended on October 5, 2009. Auer Witte Thiel: Can landlord from which this conclusion Landlord move BGH judgment have explained even Auer Witte Thiel, you can properly terminate a tenancy if the Mietruckstand of the tenant but less than two is more than one month’s rent, the judgment of the Federal Court of Justice. Even if exceeds the default duration of one month, two but not yet reached, the landlord may terminate. The two-month notice according to 569, para 3 No. 3 BGB touched in this case. About the law firm Auer Witte Thiel, the specialization areas of focus and the development of core competencies in certain disciplines are indispensable in the legal services sector. Auer Witte Thiel is a business law oriented law firm and represents several German insurance companies. The firm Auer Witte Thiel is Munich. The verdict, Auer Witte Thiel provides additional information under available. How to contact with Auer Witte Thiel lawyers Bayerstrasse 27 80335 Munich phone: 089/59 98 97 60 fax: 089 / 550 38 71 E-Mail: Web:
Impure public goods are goods which only partially meet the criteria for public goods. > A common or collective good is a good that is freely accessible to all potential buyers. Commons can be provided by the State or by private providers (for example, parts of the Internet or the Wikipedia). Public goods and common goods are Community goods with the property of not from IDC. A resource is free, if you can use them without permission “or neutral given permission to use them.” (Lawrence Lessing) > Creative Commons (abbreviated CC; for Creative Commons, Commons) is a non-profit organization that was founded in 2001. They published several standard license agreements, with which an author of the public easily concede rights to his works can. These licenses are not tailored to a single type of plant, but applicable to any works covered by copyright copyright protection, for example texts, images, music tracks, video clips, etc.
Free content are created in this way. Contrary to a common misconception, Creative Commons is not the name of a license. The different licenses have great differences of Creative Commons. Some CC licenses relatively heavily restrict the use, others make sure that copyright is waived as far as possible. Published someone, for example, a work under the CC-BY-SA license, then he allows the use by other people, but the copyright as well as the relevant licence must be specified. This is the license Wikipedia uses; Free content, whether under a CC license or another, are important for people who want to or can not spend money for texts, pictures, music, etc. In addition must be content under specific CC licenses changed and processed be. This is important for people who want to go to for example artistically with the content. The works of a creator (such as text, music, images, videos, etc.) Private property are usually copyright protected.