German High Court Sets New Limits on Injury Claims: Side Hustles Included, Employer Immunity Upheld
13.06.2026 - 06:43:36 | boerse-global.de
A 2021 ruling from Germany's Federal Court of Justice (BGH) has raised the bar for reducing compensation when accident victims refuse medical treatment, especially for psychological injuries. In the case, an injured person declined depression therapy, and a lower court cut his damages accordingly. The BGH reversed that decision, stressing that a breach of the duty to mitigate damages requires culpable inaction. For mental health conditions, courts must investigate whether the refusal itself is a consequence of the accident. The burden of proof lies with the party causing the harm. Only after that party names reasonable steps the victim failed to take must the victim explain why they were not followed. Blanket percentage cuts are not allowed.
The same legal principle that loss of earnings is compensable also applies to secondary jobs, though with deductions. The Nuremberg Higher Regional Court ruled in March 2019 on a painter who also worked as a limousine driver. After a traffic accident in June 2016, he was unable to do either job. The judges confirmed that lost income from a side job is generally recoverable. The victim does not need to first claim continued wage payment from the side employer. However, saved expenses are subtracted. For the main occupation, the court set net earnings at €3,141.79 per month; for the side job, €2,289.40 – minus ten percent for travel and cleaning costs.
Employers enjoy strong liability protection for workplace accidents. The Federal Labor Court confirmed on November 28, 2019, that an employer is only liable for personal injury if they intentionally caused both the breach of duty and the damage. In the underlying case, a nurse was injured on company premises. The winter maintenance crew had been negligent – that was not enough for employer liability.
Employer liability for workplace injuries is a critical concern across jurisdictions. In the UK, the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974 places clear duties on employers, and failing to document compliance can lead to significant penalties. A free toolkit with risk assessments, checklists, and a director's liability guide helps UK businesses stay protected. Download the free Health & Safety at Work Act 1974 Toolkit
Social insurance law adds further hurdles. The Baden-Württemberg State Social Court ruled in October 2011 that accident compensation pensions from statutory accident insurance are subject to social security contributions if the recipient is voluntarily insured in the statutory health insurance system. Such pensions are treated as employment income because they replace lost earnings.
Two decisions from June 11, 2026, illustrate the range of liability questions. On that day, the BGH ordered a municipality to pay damages for failing to remove a recovered passport from a police wanted list. The city must now cover the travel costs of over €12,000 plus rebooking fees. Meanwhile, the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court dismissed compensation claims against a vaccine manufacturer. The court found no negative risk-benefit ratio for the active substance. Regulatory approval already indicates a positive ratio, which was enough to reject the claim.
Successfully enforcing damage claims requires detailed proof of causation and legal responsibility. Whether the issue is lost earnings or property damage, without clear evidence the injured party often ends up bearing the costs.
