Enforcing jurisdiction
Germany · Geography does not establish applicable law.
Confirmed applicable legislation

Court case 2 AZR 225/20 – Court Ruling (Germany, 2022)

Court Ruling
DPA ArbGNrnberg25 August 2022Germany
final
Court Ruling

Privacy enforcement record

This record is classified outside cookie consent. Subject classification does not confirm an applicable law. It is not included in cookie statistics or the Risk Calculator.

A German court ruled on a case involving the dismissal of a data protection officer, affirming their special protection against unfair termination. The court found that data protection officers cannot be dismissed without just cause, even if the dismissal is not related to their duties. This ruling reinforces the importance of protecting the independence of data protection officers in organizations.

What happened

The German court ruled on the validity of a termination of a data protection officer's employment.

Who was affected

The data protection officer whose employment was terminated.

What the authority found

The court determined that the officer had special protection against dismissal, which was not respected by the employer.

Why this matters

This case highlights the need for organizations to respect the rights of data protection officers, ensuring their independence and ability to perform their duties without fear of unfair dismissal.

Recorded legal citations
Automatically processed
View original scraped data
Art. 38(3) GDPR

Original imported citations before automated processing; the processing history does not establish independent verification.

Decision AuthorityBAG
Reviewed AuthorityArbG Nürnberg

Source checks

Linked-source text retrieved.

Automated check recorded — 20 March 2026.

Processing notes: national law identified, authority corrected.

Retrieved text may be a secondary summary or an announcement. These automated statuses do not establish that the original decision was read or that the record received an independent legal review. How we check sources

Full Legal Summary
Detailed

The case concerns a dispute regarding the validity of an ordinary termination of a data protection officer's (DPO) employment relationship. The plaintiff had been working for the defendant as the company DPO starting on 1 February 2018. In a letter dated 13 July 2018, the defendant, the plaintiff's employer, terminated the employment relationship with effect from 15 August 2018. In order to make the termination effective, the defendant invoked a restructuring measure which had led to the discontinuation of the plaintiff's need for employment. The plaintiff applied for a declaration to declare that the employment relationship between her and the defendant was not terminated by the defendant's notice of termination. The plaintiff invoked a special protection against the dismissal of DPOs pursuant to section 38(2) in conjunction with section 6(4) sentence 2 of the German Federal Data Protection, according to which DPOs may not be dismissed without observing a notice period unless facts exist which entitle the employer to terminate the employment relationship for "good cause". The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the action, arguing that the plaintiff could not invoke the special protection as the law would violated Article 38(3) GDPR which mandates that DPOs shall only be protected from dismissals which relate to the performance of their tasks. Consequently, the court asked the CJEU for a preliminary ruling on whether, as argued by the defendant, the national and European norms are in conflict. The CJEU answered that the norms are not in conflict. Therefore, the German Federal Labour Court decided to agree with the plaintiff. According to the CJEU (see C-534/20), Article 38(3) second sentence GDPR is to be interpreted as not precluding a national rule, under which a data protection officer employed by a controller or processor may be dismissed only for good cause, even if the dismissal is not related to the performance of his or her duties, provided that that rule does not prejudice the attainment of the objectives of the GDPR. This is not the case in regards the discussed provisions of the German data protection law. Based on this CJEU ruling, the Federal Labour Court elaborated that the special protection against dismissal protects data protection officers from losing their job which may threaten them - even in a disguised form - because of the performance of his or her duties. Moreover, the special protection against dismissal protects their independence in the performance of their statutory duties, which benefits the enforcement of the objectives of the German data protection law and the GDPR.

Outcome

Court Ruling

A ruling by a national court on a data-protection matter.

Related Cases (0)

No other cases found for Court case 2 AZR 225/20 in DE

This is the only recorded case for this entity in this jurisdiction.

Details

Ruling Date

25 August 2022

Authority

DPA ArbGNrnberg

About this data

Data: GDPRhub (noyb.eu)
Licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Automatically normalized and classified

Cite as: Cookie Fines. Court case 2 AZR 225/20 - Germany (2022). Retrieved from cookiefines.eu

Report Inaccuracy

Last updated: