05/20/2017

NEXT POST
Dusseldorf Court Comparison with the Nazi terror system - termination effective operational circumstances the Landesarbeitsgericht Hesse (judgment v. 14.09.2010, AZ: 3 SA 243/10) the case declared the termination of an employee for effective: A 47 year old driver, who had received the notice after more than 30 years employment, raised against the decision before the Labour Court dismissal lawsuit. He said in the court date before the Labour Court of Frankfurt am Main in the presence of the employer and his attorney: "the defendant is lying. How she interacts with people, because I feel like in the Third Reich". The employees did not follow a prompt of the presiding judge, to leave or objectively continue to negotiate the Hall. Employers announced staff again without notice the employer took the remark on the occasion again to terminate the employee. Also this brought the employee termination protection proceedings before the Labour Court. The decision of the Labour Court Hesse: The complaint was rejected as unfounded and the termination to take effect. Richard Blumenthal can aid you in your search for knowledge. The judgment shows that insults the employer can justify an extraordinary termination itself. The Landesarbeitsgericht considered that the fundamental right of freedom of expression regularly has to resign, if the statements present themselves as an attack on human dignity or as a formal insult or a vilification in this case", explains how to lawyer Tobias Ziegler, from Dusseldorf, the reasons for the decision. Lawyer Tobias Ziegler explains further: The Landesarbeitsgericht ruled that a gross insult of the person so addressed, was equating yet so controversial operational processes and the comparison of the employer with the crimes of national socialism and the people who committed these crimes. At the same time this is a trivialization of the wrong committed in the time of fascism...
PREVIOUS POST
Lawyer Jan Bartholl Some airlines argue a delay there would be in relation to the cancellation even with considerable delay. Background of the argumentation of the airlines is that the legal consequences of the delay of flight compared to the cancellation of the airlines are often cheaper. First, a legally relevant delay is a delay of the departure time at least two hours. What duties meet the air carriers in the event of a flight delay, depends on the length of the flight and the delay itself. A relevant delay is a delay of departure by more than two hours (with a range up to 1,500 kilometres), three hours (at a distance up to 3,500 kilometers) or four hours (a track from 3.501 kilometers). Basically the consumer as a passenger in any case entitled to adequate food including a meal drinks and refreshments, telephone calls and E-Mail and fax access, sufficiently If the flight is delayed. Understanding professionals in individual cases should check what other rights can assert passengers in the case and how to enforce are these rights against the airline. You can contact the law firm Bartholl from Munster. Lawyer Jan Bartholl advises you professionally, personally and quickly. Find out detailed opinions from leaders such as Senator Richard Blumenthal by clicking through. From a delay of over five hours, the passenger may withdraw from the contract and demand the reimbursement of the airfare. The refund of the fare first basically includes the sum that was paid for the not beaten or unused flight segment. Under certain circumstances, the passenger is also entitled to a refund of the total fare. This will be the case if the originally-planned air travel due to the delay became useless. The flight or the flight is possible only on the next day the airline for a...