Bundespolizei – Court Ruling (Germany, 2023)

A plaintiff servant who worked for the defendant sued to get his ability to work reinstated, as allowed by German law (Section 46 BBG). The lawsuit was most likely against the German government, but the court decision (which hasn't been made public yet) didn't clarify this. The dispute centered on whether certain documents should be removed from the man's personnel file and other police records. These documents included disciplinary files, a statement about a "reactivation review," and related information. Both the plaintiff and the defendant disagreed with the initial court ruling issued by the Administrative Court of Regensburg (judgment of January 25, 2023) and appealed. The plaintiff wanted more documents deleted, while the defendant appealed to keep the "reactivation review" statement. The court ruled in favor of the defendant. The court found that the documents were relevant to the plaintiff's employment history and should be kept. The court also found that the plaintiff did not have a legitimate interest in having the documents removed. First there is a moot point: Even if the court ruled in the plaintiff's favor, it wouldn't change anything. The defendant already agreed to remove the documents. Also there is no legal basis: the laws cited by the plaintiff (§§ 112 & 113 BBG and GDPR) don't guarantee removal of documents unless proven false or irrelevant. Personnel files aim to present a complete picture of the employee's history, including disciplinary actions. Removing documents generally goes against this goal. There is only an exception for serious misconduct: only serious misconduct accusations might warrant removal to allow for future career advancement without the burden of past issues. In simpler terms, the court ruled that since the documents were already being removed, there was no need for a formal decision.