LAG Rhineland-Palatinate: No old-age discrimination claim for lawyers!

LAG Rhineland-Palatinate: No old-age discrimination claim for lawyers!

The State Labor Court (LAG) Rhineland-Palatinate has rejected a lawsuit for compensation for age discrimination in a current judgment. The decision concerns an applicant who applied to a position as a syndic lawyer and received a cancellation. The lawyer, 49 years old, submitted his application in May 2023 and was rejected, of which he claimed compensation in the amount of four monthly salaries. Class = "Source_1"> Haufe reports of the lawsuit that was based on the claim for compensation in accordance with Section 15 (2) AGG.

The job advertisement to which the plaintiff referred to, expressly searched for "young professionals or applicants with around 6 years of professional experience". This was revealed in the company's argument, which spoke against the claim of age discrimination. The court found that this wording is not discriminatory and confirmed that an employer does not have to invite any applicant to an interview as long as the exclusion is not based on discriminatory reasons.

No discrimination according to AGG

According to the judgment of the LAG of December 5, 2024, Az.: 5 SLA 81/24, there was no discriminatory job advertisement. The employer had argued that in the last few years of the plaintiff - in three of the last four employment relationships within six months - the termination played a relevant role in the decision. According to the LAG, it is legitimate to conclude from application documents as long as the criteria used are not discriminatory. lto Background of the decision in more detail.

The General Equal Treatment Act (AGG) generally prohibits discrimination due to age. Nevertheless, there are exceptions, especially if a legitimate goal is objectively and adequately justified by the criterion. Hensche indicates that age discrimination and settings in particular If it is not primarily supported by legitimate goals. In this case, however, the requirement for specific work experience would not have been considered age discrimination.

The judgment of the LAG is another concise indication that the formulation of job advertisements must be carefully carried out to ensure that they are appealing for all suitable applicants without violating the AGG. The case will surely further heat the discussion about discrimination and equal treatment in the labor market.

The case law continues to develop and it remains to be seen how similar cases will be treated in the future.