Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-c654p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-25T11:01:58.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Case Note - Judgment of the Landgericht Frankfurt (Oder) (Regional Court) of 22 June 2010: Hotelier's Right to Ban Persons from Hotel Premises

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Jule Mulder  and
Andrea Gideon

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

On 22 June 2010, the Landgericht Frankfurt (Oder) (Regional Court) ruled on whether a hotel was entitled to deny a member of a nationalist party entrance to its establishment because of the individual's political beliefs or whether such discriminatory conduct constituted an illegal violation of the personality right of that person which would constitute a tort under § 823 of the Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (German Civil Code, “BGB”). In making its decision, the Court balanced a property owner's freedom of autonomy, specifically the owner's right to ban a customer from his or her establishment, against the customer's personal rights. Furthermore, the Court considered whether a hotel owner's decision to ban a customer based on his or her political beliefs violated the Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz (General Equal Treatment Law, “AGG”). Considering the fundamental question of balancing competing interests, of the personal right of the customer and the right of the property owner, and the national public debate concerning the right of members of nationalistic parties to be treated equally, the case goes beyond the interests of the parties involved and is of general importance.

Type
Developments
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 11 , Issue 10 , October 2010 , pp. 1147 - 1160
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 See Landgericht Frankfurt [Oder] [Regional Court], Reference No. 12 0 17/10, 22 June 2010.Google Scholar

2 See, e.g., Bundesgerichtshof [BGH] [Federal Court of Justice], Neue Juristiche Wochenshrift [NJW] 188–89 (1994) (“Market Store Case”).Google Scholar

3 See Deutscher Bundestag: Drucksachen [BT] 16/2022 no. 4(a).Google Scholar

4 See Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch [BGB] [Civil Code], 18 August 1896, §§ 903, 1004.Google Scholar

5 See id. §§ 823, 826.Google Scholar

6 See id. §§ 856, 858, 903, & 1004; see also Bundesgerichtshof [BGH] [Federal Court of Justice], Neue Juristiche Wochenshrift [NJW] 1054–55 (2006) (“Airport Case”).Google Scholar

7 See Brinkmann, Moritz, § 145, in Kommentar zum BGB margin numbers 18–23 (Hanns Prütting, Gerhard Wegen & Gerd Weinreich eds., 2nd ed., 2007); Jürgen Ellenberger, Einf. § 145, in Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch margin number 8 (Otto Palandt ed., 69th ed., 2010).Google Scholar

8 See Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch [BGB] [Civil Code], 18 Aug. 1896, § 823 (“Wer vorsätzlich oder fahrlässig das Leben, den Körper, die Gesundheit, die Freiheit, das Eigentum oder ein sonstiges Recht eines anderen widerrechtlich verletzt, ist dem anderen zum Ersatz des daraus entstehenden Schadens verpflichtet.”).Google Scholar

9 See Hanns Prütting, § 12, in Kommentar zum BGB margin numbers 31–36 (Hanns Prütting, Gerhard Wegen & Gerd Weinreich eds., 2nd ed., 2007); Hartwig Sprau, Einf. § 823, in Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch margin number 19 (Otto Palandt ed., 69th ed., 2010).Google Scholar

10 See Schaub, Renate, § 823, in Kommentar zum BGB (Hanns Prütting, Gerhard Wegen & Gerd Weinreich eds., 2nd ed., 2007), margin number 13; Sprau, supra note 9, at margin number 24.Google Scholar

11 See Prütting, supra note 9, at margin number 37; Gerald Spindler, § 823, in Kommentar zum BGB margin number 17 (Hanns Prütting, Gerhard Wegen & Gerd Weinreich eds., 2nd ed., 2007); Sprau, supra note 9, at margin number 24.Google Scholar

12 For an academic critique of horizontal anti-discrimination law, See Isensee, J., Vertragsfreiheit und Diskriminierung (2007); K. Adomeit, Diskriminierung—Inflation eines Begriffes, 55 Neue Juristische Wochenshrift (NJW) 1622–23 (2002); K. Adomeit, Schutz gegen Diskriminierung—eine neue Runde, 56 NJW 1162 (2003); J. Braun, Forum: Übrings—Deutschland wird wieder totalitär, 42 Juristische Schulung (JuS) 424–25 (2002); T. Pfeiffer, Diskriminierung oder Nichtdiskriminierung –was ist hier eigentlich die Frage, 1 Zeitschrift für Vertragsgestaltung, Schuld- und Haftungsrecht (ZGS) 165 (2002); E. Picker, Antidiskriminierung als Zivilrechtsprogramm, 58 Juristenzeitung (JZ) 540–45 (2003); E. Picker, Antidiskriminierung—Der Anfang vom Ende der Privatautonomie?, 57 JZ 880–82 (2002); M. Rath & E.M. Rütz, Ende der Ladies Night, der Ü-30-Parties und der Partnervermittlung im Internet?, 21 NJW 1498–1500 (2007); H. Reichold, Sozialgerechtigkeit versus Vertragsgerechtigkeit—arbeitsrechtliche Erfahrungen mit Diskriminierungsregeln, 59 JZ 348–93 (2004); C. Rolfs, Allgemeine Gleichbehandlung im Mietrecht, 60 NJW 1489–94 (2007); F. J. Säcker, Vernunft statt Freiheit! Die Tugendrepublik der neuen Jakobiner, 35 Zeitschrift für Rechtspolitik (ZRP) 286–90 (2002).Google Scholar

13 See, e.g., D. Schiek, Differenzierte Gerechtigkeit? Diskriminierungsschutz und Vertragsrecht (2000); U. Wendeling-Schröder, Diskriminierung und Privilegierung im Arbeitsleben, in Festschrift für Peter Schwerdtner zum 65. Geburtstag 269, 270–71 (J.H. Bauer ed., 2003) (referring to the human rights approach of the directives and the aim of the social integration); S. Baer, Ende der Privatautonomie oder grundrechtlich fundierte Rechtsetzung?, 35 ZRP 290–94 (2002); S. Baer, Objektiv-neutral-gerecht? Feministische Rechtswissenschaft am Beispiel sexueller Diskriminierung im Erwerbsleben, 77 Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft (KritV) 154–78 (1994); B. Degen, Das Allgemeine Gleichbehandlungsgesetz (AGG)—Tanzschritte auf dem Weg zur Gerechtigkeit im Erwerbsleben, 25 Streit 15–22 (2007); E. Eichenhofer, Diskriminierungsschutz und Privatrecht, 119 Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt (DVBI) 1078–86 (2004); N. Eisenschmid, Europäischer Verbraucherschutz: Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz (AGG), 59 Wohnungswirtschaft und Mietrecht (WuM) 475–79 (2006); D. König, Antidiskriminierungsrichtline vor der Umsetzung, 36 ZRP 315–18 (2003); R. Kühn, Das Recht auf Zugang zu Gaststätten und das Verbot der Rassendiskriminierung, 39 NJW 1397–1402 (1986); J. Neuner, Diskriminierung durch Privatrecht, 58 JZ 57–66 (2003); D. Schiek, Gleichberechtigungsrichtlinien der EU—Umsetzung im deutschen Arbeitsrecht, 21 Neue Zeitschrift für Arbeitsrecht (NZA) 873–84 (2004); R. Winter, Mittelbare Diskriminierung bei gleichwertiger Arbeit, 15 Zeitschrift für Tarifrecht (ZTR) 7–15 (2001).Google Scholar

14 There have been several cases where people were denied entrance to pubs, bars and restaurants based on their ethnic origin or race. See, e.g., Amtsgericht Oldenburg [Local Court], Case no. E2 C 2126/07, 23 July 2008, NdsRpfl 398–99 (2009).Google Scholar

15 See Bundesarbeitsgericth [BAG] [Federal Labor Court], Case no. AZR 472/01, 10 October 2002, NJW 1685 (2003); see also Sacksofsky, Ute, Religion and Equality in Germany: The Headscarf Debate from a Constitutional Perspective, in European Union Non-discrimination Law 353, 358 (Dagmar Schiek & Victoria Chege eds., 2008).Google Scholar

16 Deutscher Bundestag: Drucksachen [BT] 16/2022 no. 4(a).Google Scholar

17 See Council Directive 2004/113/EC, 13 December 2004, 2004 O.J. (L373) 37 (implementing the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services).Google Scholar

18 See Council Directive 2000/43/EC, 29 June 2000, 2000 O.J. (L180) 22 (implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin).Google Scholar

19 See Proposal for a Council Directive on Implementing the Principle of Equal Treatment Between Persons Irrespective of Religion or Belief, Disability, Age or Sexual Orientation, 27 August 2008, COM(2008) 426 final. A quick enactment of the proposed Directive, however, seems unlikely. See Schiek, Dagmar & Mulder, Jule, Intersecrionality in EU Law—a Critical Re-appraisal, in EU Non-discrimination Law and Intersectionality—Investigating the Triangle Between Racial, Gender and Disability Discrimination (Dagmar Schiek & Anna Lawson eds., forthcoming 2010).Google Scholar

20 See Council Directive 2000/78/EC, 27 November 2000, 2000 O.J. (L303) 16 (establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation.Google Scholar

21 See Gerards, Janneke, Discrimination Grounds, in Cases, Materials and Texts on National, Supernational and International Non-discrimination Law 33, 102 (Dagmar Schiek, Lisa Waddington & Mark Bell eds., 2007).Google Scholar

22 See id. at 33, 117, 120 (providing examples from different Member States).Google Scholar

23 See Schiek, Dagmar, Einleitung, in Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz ein Kommentar aus Europäischer Perspektive margin number 72 (Dagmar Schiek ed., 2007). For an overview on the different language versions, see Wolfgang Däubler, § 1, in Nomos Kommentar zum Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz 58–71 (Wolfgang Däubler & Marin Bertzbach eds., 2nd ed., 2008).Google Scholar

24 See Schiek, Dagmar, § 1, in Allgemeines Gleichbehanldungsgesetz ein Kommentar aus Europäischer Perspektive margin number 23 (Dagmar Schiek ed., 2007).Google Scholar

25 See Campbell and Cosans v. United Kingdom, 48 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) (1982).Google Scholar

26 See id. at para. 36.Google Scholar

27 See, e.g., Mark Bell, A Patchwork of Protection: The New Anti-discrimination Law Framework, 67 Modern L. Rev. 465, 468 (2004); Equality and Diversity: The Employment Equality Regulations 2003, The National Archives, http://www.dti.gov.uk/er/equality/eeregs.htm (last visited 4 July 2010).Google Scholar

28 See Gerards, supra note 21, at 117–18.Google Scholar

29 See Kokett, Juliane, Art. 4, in Kommentar zum Grundgesetz (Michael Sachs ed., 3rd ed., 2003), margin number 20; see also Bundesarbeitsgericht [BAG] [Federal Labor Court], Case No. 5 AZB 21/94, 22 March 1995, NZA 823, 827 (1995) (“Scientology Case”).Google Scholar

30 See Schiek, supra note 24, at margin number 24 (providing further references).Google Scholar

31 See Deutscher Bundestag: Drucksachen [BT] 16/2022 no. 4(a) (indicating that the term belief (Weltansschauung) should be interpreted narrowly and does not include political opinion). But see Jürgen Ellenberger, § 1, in Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (Otto Palandt ed., 69th ed., 2010), margin number 5 (providing a dissenting opinion and arguing that the correct meaning of belief also includes political opinions). However, Ellenberger comes to the same result, as he considers political opinions which threaten the democratic and free state to be outside of the meaning of belief. See also Däubler, supra note 23, at margin number 71.Google Scholar

32 Natan Lerner, Group Rights and Discrimination in International Law 78 (2nd ed., 2003).Google Scholar

33 See Campbell and Cosans v. United Kingdom, 48 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) (1982).Google Scholar

34 See id. at para. 36.Google Scholar

35 See, e.g., X v. Austria, Application No. 1747/62, 13 December 1963, 6 Y.B. Eur. Conv. H.R. 424 (1963); see also Gerards, supra note 21, at 33, 120 (for further discussion).Google Scholar