LAG Niedersachen (Regional Labour Court), verdict of 25th August 2025 - 15 SLa 315/25

Facts of the case

The parties dispute the validity of an extraordinary dismissal, alternatively an ordinary dismissal, of the plaintiff.

​

The plaintiff had been employed as a loader and unloader by the defendant since February 2019. On October 22, 2024, he was observed by a team leader using his private smartphone during working hours—behavior prohibited by company policy. This led to a physical altercation between the plaintiff and the team leader: the plaintiff allegedly pushed the team leader away, made a kicking motion, and gestured with a raised index finger. The incident was recorded on video. The plaintiff had previously been warned or reminded of company rules due to similar breaches of duty. The defendant subsequently terminated the employment relationship with immediate effect, alternatively with ordinary notice.

​

The Hannover Labor Court initially upheld the plaintiff’s claim against dismissal. However, on appeal by the defendant, the Lower Saxony Regional Labor Court overturned the judgment and dismissed the claim.

Reasons for the decision

The Regional Labor Court deemed the extraordinary dismissal valid.

The plaintiff’s behavior on October 22, 2024—especially pushing and kicking the team leader in connection with the prohibited use of a smartphone—constituted a serious breach of duty justifying immediate dismissal under Section 626 (1) of the German Civil Code (BGB).

​

After reviewing the video recording, the court saw no need to hear additional witnesses. The plaintiff reacted physically without any understandable reason and showed no remorse or insight afterward. Instead, he continued using the smartphone, violating company rules.

​

A prior warning was unnecessary because the plaintiff’s conduct was so severe that a mere reprimand was not appropriate. Given the seriousness of the breach, reassignment to another workplace was also ruled out.

​

Leave to appeal was denied.

Conclusion & practical tip

The case shows that even in situations with objectively clear and well-documented breaches of duty—such as here, supported by video evidence—erroneous decisions can occur at the first instance. The labor court did not consider the violations serious enough to justify an immediate dismissal. Only the Regional Labor Court, in the second instance, reached a different assessment.

This case highlights that judicial decisions can heavily depend on the perspective of the presiding judge. Therefore, employers and employees are advised—and should be prepared from the outset of a court proceeding—to consider appealing in order to have incorrect decisions corrected.

​

Further blog posts on the topic: Invalid Termination​​ and  Immediate Dismissal