Insult with no consequences

The Schleswig-Holstein Regional Labor Court recently dismissed an appeal filed by an employer who had taken legal action against offensive remarks made by a former employee

The defendant in the legal dispute had worked as a sales clerk in the plaintiff’s store. Under the terms of her employment contract, her employer was obligated to support her in attending night school and to take this into account when scheduling her work, but this obligation was not fulfilled. She was terminated before the end of her probationary period. When she came to collect her personal belongings from the company, she asked another employee whether her former boss had also failed to keep his promises to her. During this conversation, she also referred to her former boss as an a**hole. The employer objected to the defamation and sought a cease-and-desist order in court.

The Court’s Ruling

The judges ruled as follows: In cases of insults, a distinction must be made between statements of fact, the truth of which can be verified, and value judgments. A restriction on freedom of expression for the sake of protecting someone’s reputation is only justified if the criticism is defamatory, meaning the statement is intended solely to disparage the person in question. The statement that the employer does not keep his promises is based on the defendant’s subjective feelings, and the court clarifies: She is entitled to hold this opinion and to express it. Furthermore, the judges determined: Whether the defendant actually referred to the managing director as an “asshole” need not be clarified, because the defendant employee had since stated that she would no longer make such statements in the future. Therefore, the risk of repetition required for a court-ordered cease-and-desist declaration is lacking.