Yes, a comprehensive protection against discrimination applies in this case. Customers may not be discriminated against for racist/anti-Semitic reasons or on account of their ethnic origin. A comprehensive protection against discrimination applies here. That means, the discrimination ban applies to all goods and services that are publicly offered on the market, including shopping, but also all other services that are paid for, such as membership in a fitness centre, concluding an insurance, opening a bank account or going to the cinema, hairdresser’s, restaurant, bar or club. It also encompasses the letting of housing and the granting of loans.

If someone is denied a flat because their name is assumed to be of foreign origin, this constitutes discrimination on account of ethnic origin. Another example of racist discrimination is when a customer is rejected due to the colour of their skin or because she is wearing a headscarf.

The protection against discrimination covers many areas. Providers of goods and services may not reject customers on account of their ethnic origin or for racist/anti-Semitic reasons and deny them the conclusion of a contract. Nor may customers be discriminated against in the context of existing contractual relationships, for instance by offering them contracts with less favourable conditions. It is also inadmissible to terminate a contract with a customer for racist/anti-Semitic reasons.

Basically yes. However, the discrimination ban only applies to certain types of contracts. More specifically, it only applies to what is known as bulk business transactions. Generally, bulk business transactions include daily-life contracts, such as shopping at a supermarket or online store, visiting a restaurant, cinema, theatre, concert or swimming pool or using public transport. The products or services concerned are offered on a standardised basis. This kind of contract is basically concluded with any customer willing to pay.

Daily-life contracts, such as shopping or visiting a restaurant, constitute bulk business transactions and are thus covered by the General Equal Treatment Act’s (AGG) protection against discrimination on the grounds of gender, religion, a disability, age or sexual orientation. In all other cases, the freedom of contract applies. That means, business owners or service providers may decide which customers they wish to conclude a contract with. So it is legal, for instance, to reject a customer because of their political opinion or their style of clothing. For instance, a restaurant owner may reject guests who wear clothing that shows National-Socialist slogans or codes.

As a general rule, the letting of housing only constitutes a form of bulk business when a lessor lets more than 50 flats. In exceptional cases, the letting of less than 50 flats may also constitute bulk business. This is the case, for instance, when rooms are rented out commercially and can directly be booked online without the lessors choosing their tenants in advance.

For some kinds of contracts, it has not yet been definitively clarified under legal aspects whether or not they constitute bulk business transactions. These include doctors’ visits, daycare contracts and consumer credits. The Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency endorses the view that these contracts constitute bulk business transactions. For more detailed information on this topic, please see our 
position paper no. 02 – 07/2021 “Ist das Allgemeine Gleichbehandlungsgesetz auf zivilrechtliche Betreuungsverträge in der Kindertagesbetreuung anwendbar?” (Can the General Equal Treatment Act be applied to care contracts for child daycare under civil law? – only available in German) as well as the study “Altersdiskriminierung bei der Kreditvergabe” (Age discrimination in lending – only available in German), Hamburger Institut für Finanzdienstleistungen (IFF) and funded by our agency. Since there are differing legal interpretations regarding this issue, it is hard to anticipate how a court would decide here. In such cases, it therefore comes with a certain risk to take legal action.

These cases are not covered by the protection against discrimination. The freedom of contract applies here. That means, providers of goods and services may, with the exception of the discrimination bans mentioned above, choose their customers as they wish. It also means they may reject customers because of their political opinion. For instance, a hotel owner may reject guests who wear clothing that shows National-Socialist slogans or codes.

Yes, they are. Insurance providers may not discriminate against clients for racist or anti-Semitic reasons or on the grounds of their ethnic origin, gender, religion, a disability, their age or their sexual identity.

That means, the rejection or termination of a contract may generally not be based on the aforementioned grounds. Nor is it generally allowed to set higher insurance premiums or unfavourable insurance conditions for the reasons given above. Costs arising from pregnancy and maternity may on no account lead to the payment of different premiums and benefits.

Differences of treatment on the grounds of religion, a disability, age or sexual identity are admissible only if the aforementioned reasons lead to an increased insurance risk for the provider. In case of doubt, the insurer must prove this in court. That means, it must demonstrate in a plausible manner that the differences in contribution amounts are based on a risk assessment that is underpinned by statistical surveys. This argument is used, for instance, to justify age-related increases in motor insurance premiums. Insurers are not required to provide clients insights into their risk calculation methods. This kind of proof is only required in court. Therefore, taking legal action poses a significant risk to clients since it is virtually impossible for them to assess in advance whether, for instance, a risk markup or the rejection of a contract on account of a disability is justified by a risk-adequate calculation.

Yes, a very comprehensive protection against discrimination applies here. If you are denied housing because of your ethnic origin or for racist/anti-Semitic reasons, this constitutes a form of discrimination prohibited by law. Likewise, it is inadmissible to terminate your rental contract for one of these reasons. A discriminatory termination is void.

There are but a few exceptions, to which the protection against discrimination does not apply. One such exception applies if you share residential space with your lessor or their relatives on the same property. In this case, the lessor may choose their tenants and also reject them for racist/anti-Semitic reasons.

However, if someone is denied housing for discriminatory reasons, that does not mean they are entitled to receive the flat. There are individual legal positions that assume such an entitlement to exist. However, there is no settled case-law on this issue so that the chances of successfully enforcing such a claim in court are negligible.

If you were denied housing for discriminatory reasons, you can claim damages and/or compensation. As a rule, you must assert these claims to the lessor within two months of the discriminatory incident. In specific cases, you need to assert these claims to the broker. Since due to current case-law, it is controversial who would be held accountable in each individual case, you should seek legal advice in advance. For more information on this topic, see ”8. Legal steps against discrimination regarding the conclusion of contracts”.

For further information on discrimination on the housing market as well as your options for action, please see our  “fair mieten – fair wohnen” (fair renting – fair living) guidelines (only available in German).

Yes, these cases are covered by the protection against discrimination. However, the protection only applies if lessors or housing companies rent out more than 50 flats.

If you are denied a flat by a lessor renting out more than 50 flats and there is a causal relationship between the rejection and your religion, age, gender, sexual identity or a disability, this constitutes a form of discrimination that is prohibited by law. Likewise, it is inadmissible to terminate your rental contract for these reasons. A discriminatory termination is void.

Another exception from the protection against discrimination applies if you share residential space with the lessor or their relatives or if they live on the same property. In this case, the lessor may choose their tenants and also reject them for discriminatory reasons.

However, if someone is denied housing for discriminatory reasons, that does not necessarily mean they are entitled to receive the flat. There are individual legal positions that assume such an entitlement to exist. However, there is no settled case-law on this issue so that the chances of successfully enforcing such a claim in court are negligible.

If you were denied housing for discriminatory reasons, you can claim damages and/or compensation. As a rule, you must assert these claims to the lessor within two months of the discriminatory incident. In specific cases, you need to assert these claims to the broker. Since due to current case-law, it is controversial who would be responsible in each individual case, you should seek legal advice in advance. For more information on this topic, see ”8. Legal steps against discrimination regarding the conclusion of contracts”. 

For further information on discrimination on the housing market as well as your options for action, please see our “fair mieten – fair wohnen” (fair renting – fair living) guidelines (available only in German).

If you suspect you have been discriminated against when searching for housing, in the case of a dispute, you must provide evidence to suggest that there has been an instance of discrimination. So there must be indications for you having been discriminated against on account of a protected characteristic, such as for racist/anti-Semitic reasons or because of your religion. If you can provide evidence to suggest that there has been an instance of discrimination, the burden of proof shifts to the party accused of the discriminatory conduct. At this point, the housing company or lessor has to prove in court that there was a non-discriminatory explanation for their conduct.

It is difficult to furnish proof of discrimination in the context of a tense housing market, where demand significantly surpasses supply. Nowadays, the courts recognise so-called testing procedures as circumstantial evidence of discrimination. In such a testing, two people who only differ in one discrimination-critical characteristic (e.g. names indicating different origins, differences in gender or age) apply for a flat, providing otherwise identical information. Such a testing can be conducted in writing, via phone call or in person. If these otherwise identical applications lead to different outcomes, this suggests discrimination on account of the specific characteristic being tested for. A testing can be conducted by the applicant themselves. However, the procedure is complex and it is crucial to accurately perform all necessary steps in the right order. Therefore, it is recommended to conduct such a testing with the support of local or national consultation or anti-discrimination agencies.

You can find detailed information on this topic in different guides, such as this ”Arbeitshilfe zur Durchführung reaktiver Testings” (Guidance on conducting reactive testing – available only in German).

If you were refused transportation on local public transport on account of a disability, this is a breach of the discrimination ban laid down in the AGG. This is the case, for instance, if a train driver refuses to operate the ramp required for you to get on the train.

According to the AGG, however, discrimination on account of a disability during a bus or train ride may be justified by objective reasons. For instance, if the unequal treatment serves to avoid danger or prevent damage or injury. On local public transport, this might be the case if for a wheelchair user to board safely, extra staff would be required that is not available in the situation.

 What you need to bear in mind if you wish to sue

If you wish to take legal action against discrimination on account of a disability, you must, as a first step, inform the transport company of your claims in writing within two months of the discriminatory incident and collect circumstantial evidence of discrimination. For detailed information on possible legal steps to take, see the answers under “8. Legal steps against discrimination regarding the conclusion of contracts”.

 Where to find additional support

Furthermore, in case of discrimination on account of a disability, you can contact the Arbitration Service pursuant to Section 16 of the German Act on Equal Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities (BGG) at the Federal Government Commissioner for Matters relating to Persons with Disabilities to initiate an arbitration procedure:

https://www.schlichtungsstelle-bgg.de/Webs/SchliBGG/DE/AS/startseite/startseite-node.html

If your bus or train ticket is checked exclusively or partially because of your ethnic origin or for racist/anti-Semitic reasons, this is a breach of the discrimination ban laid down in the AGG.

Whether or not such checks on local public transport are discriminatory depends on each individual case. This is because in principle, every transport company may, in accordance with its general terms and conditions, require travellers at any time to show their tickets. However, it may constitute a breach of the discrimination ban, for instance, if you, as a black person, are the only passenger in the train compartment who has their ticket checked.

What you need to bear in mind if you wish to sue

If you wish to take legal action against your ticket having been checked for racist reasons, you must, as a first step, inform the transport company of your claims in writing within two months of the discriminatory incident and collect circumstantial evidence of discrimination. For detailed information on possible legal steps to take, see the answers under “8. Legal steps against discrimination regarding the conclusion of contracts”.

Where to find additional support

Furthermore, in case of discrimination on local public transport, you can contact the impartial söp conciliation body for local public transport to initiate an out-of-court conciliation procedure with the transport company in question free of charge:

https://soep-online.de/

If a fitness centre denies you membership because you wear a headscarf, this might constitute a breach of the discrimination ban laid down in the AGG. Since if there is no verifiable objective reason for the unequal treatment, the incident may constitute discrimination on account of religion.

Whether or not denying someone the conclusion of a gym contract because the person in question wears a headscarf constitutes a form of discrimination prohibited under the AGG depends on each individual case. That is because according to the AGG, discrimination on account of religion can be justified by verifiable objective reasons. One example of such an objective reason would be if the unequal treatment served to avoid danger or prevent damage or injury. In a fitness centre, this might be the case if someone wearing a headscarf risks hurting herself on the sports equipment used. For instance, the Regional Court of Bremen decided that a fitness centre banning training with a headscarf due to the risk of injury does not constitute a breach of the ban on discrimination on account of religion (Regional Court Bremen, Decision of 06/212013 – 4 S 89/12). That means, whether or not the unequal treatment can be justified may depend on the type of sports done and the equipment used at the fitness centre. If sports headscarves are used, it is difficult to argue for a risk of injury. It also depends on how strictly the ban is enforced in the fitness centre in question. If, as a rule, all headwear is banned but baseball caps are allowed, this constitutes a breach of the discrimination ban.

If there is no plausible explanation why you should not be allowed to train wearing your headscarf and this is why you are denied membership in a fitness centre, this falls under the ban on discrimination on account of religion. For instance, a fitness centre may not justify your exclusion with the argument that wearing a headscarf inside the centre for religious reasons was banned to ‘prevent damage to its image’.

What you need to bear in mind if you wish to sue

If you wish to take legal action against discrimination on account of religion, you must, as a first step, inform the fitness centre of your claims in writing within two months of the discriminatory denial of a contract and collect circumstantial evidence of discrimination. For detailed information on possible legal steps to take, see the answers under “8. Legal steps against discrimination regarding the conclusion of contracts”.

If a fitness centre directly or indirectly denies you membership because of your ethnic origin or for racist/anti-Semitic reasons, this is a breach of the discrimination ban laid down in the AGG.

 A rejection on account of your ethnic origin or for racist/anti-Semitic reasons cannot be justified by any explanation on part of the fitness centre. For instance, a fitness chain was sentenced by the Regional Court of Aachen to pay a compensation of 2.500 euros to a man from Sierra Leone, who had sued the company for discrimination on account of his gender and origin (Regional Court Aachen, Decision of 05/11/2017 - 2 S 26/17). Several membership applications by the plaintiff had been rejected (including because of the ‘poor payment discipline of male members with a migration background’), while German citizens had been accepted without any problems.

What you need to bear in mind if you wish to sue

If you wish to take legal action against racist discrimination, you must, as a first step, inform the fitness centre of your claims in writing within two months of the discriminatory refusal of a contract and collect circumstantial evidence of discrimination. For detailed information on possible legal steps to take, see the answers under “8. Legal steps against discrimination regarding the conclusion of contracts”.

Unfortunately, it is still a reality that people with assistance dogs are denied access to certain facilities. These include supermarkets, hotels, doctors’ surgeries, cafeterias and restaurants. This is often justified with the argument of the owners’ domestic authority. However, that is not a valid point.

By now, the legal situation regarding this issue is very clear as since 1 July 2021, we have a legal regulation on the equal treatment of persons with disabilities (section 12 of the BGG). This regulation requires all facilities that are usually open to and used by the public to allow people accompanied by assistance dogs access to their premises.

The only exception applies when the access with an assistance dog would impose a “disproportionate or undue burden” on the facility in question.

Grocery stores or doctors’ surgeries may cite reasons of hygiene to justify a denial of access for people accompanied by assistance dogs. In supermarkets, however, this usually does not apply if the animal does not come into contact with the food offered – . According to the German Hospital Federation, there are generally no medical reasons why assistance dogs should not access hospitals or other medical facilities.

If you are illegally denied access in violation of section 12 of the BGG, this may, at the same time, constitute a breach of the discrimination ban. The prerequisite is that the General Equal Treatment Act (AGG) applies. The AGG provides protection from discrimination in the context of what is known as bulk business transactions. Accessing hotels, restaurants or supermarkets are actions that are indisputably considered bulk business. By contrast, it has not yet been clarified whether the AGG’s protection against discrimination also applies to medical treatment contracts.  For an overview of this topic, check “1.2. As a customer, am I protected from discrimination on the grounds of gender, religion, a disability, age or sexual identity?”. 

What you need to bear in mind if you wish to sue

If you wish to take legal action against discrimination on account of a disability, you must, as a first step, inform the facility operator of your claims in writing within two months of the discriminatory denial of access and collect circumstantial evidence of discrimination. For detailed information on possible legal steps to take, see the answers under “8. Legal steps against discrimination regarding the conclusion of contracts”.

Where to find additional support

Furthermore, in case of discrimination on account of a disability, you can contact the Arbitration Service pursuant to Section 16 of the German Act on Equal Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities (BGG) at the Federal Government Commissioner for Matters relating to Persons with Disabilities to initiate an arbitration procedure:

https://www.schlichtungsstelle-bgg.de/Webs/SchliBGG/DE/AS/startseite/startseite-node.html

If a doctor discriminates against you on account of a disability, this may constitute a breach of the discrimination ban laid down in the AGG.

If you undergo medical treatment in a doctors’ surgery or a hospital, you conclude a medical treatment contract. Whether or not medical treatment contracts are included in the business transactions covered by the AGG’s protection against discrimination has not yet been clarified by case-law. Up to now, the courts did not have to deal with many cases regarding this issue. The Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency holds the view that the AGG provides protection from discrimination in the context of a medical treatment contract. We have compiled our arguments regarding this issue in our position paper no. 01 – 09/2020 “Ist das Allgemeine Gleichbehandlungsgesetz auf medizinische Behandlungsverträge anwendbar?“ (Can the General Equal Treatment Act be applied to medical treatment contracts).

According to the AGG, however, discrimination on account of a disability when seeing a doctor may be justified by objective reasons. This may be the case, for instance, if the unequal treatment serves to avoid danger or prevent damage. In the context of a visit to the doctor, this might be assumed, for instance, if a patient could be contagious and special protective measures to avoid further spreading of the infection are required. However, a complete refusal of treatment can hardly be justified since there are other possible methods to achieve the purpose of preventing further infection, such as offering specific office hours for infectious patients or carefully disinfecting all treatment equipment.

The protection under the AGG also applies if the treatment is performed in a private clinic. That is because the freedom of a clinic to decide with whom to conclude a treatment contract is restricted by the AGG’s protection against discrimination.

The freedom of doctors to refuse treatment, however, is not only restricted by the AGG, but also by the Declaration of Geneva. According to this Declaration, doctors commit to treat all people in need of medical treatment without reservations. The Declaration reads: “I WILL NOT PERMIT considerations of age, disease or disability, creed, ethnic origin, gender, nationality, political affiliation, race, sexual orientation, social standing or any other factor to intervene between my duty and my patient; (Geneva Declaration, 2017)

What you need to bear in mind if you wish to sue

If you wish to take legal action against discrimination on account of a disability, you must, as a first step, inform the doctors’ surgery of your claims in writing within two months of the discriminatory incident and collect circumstantial evidence of discrimination. For detailed information on possible legal steps to take, see the answers under “8. Legal steps against discrimination regarding the conclusion of contracts”.

For information on additional support services, check the answer to question “6.4 Where can I find additional support if I was discriminated against when seeing a doctor?”.

If you are discriminated against directly or indirectly by a doctor because of an HIV infection, that may constitute a breach of the AGG’s ban on discrimination on account of a disability.

That is because according to previous decisions by the Federal Labour Court, an HIV infection without symptoms is considered a disability within the meaning of the AGG. According to the decision in question, this is the case as long as an HIV-positive person is stigmatised by their social environment and thus prevented from the full participation in social life (Federal Labour Court, Decision of 12/19/2019 – 6 AZR 190/12).

If you undergo medical treatment in a doctors’ surgery or a hospital, you conclude a medical treatment contract. The question whether medical treatment contracts are included in the business transactions covered by the AGG’s protection against discrimination is controversially discussed in jurisprudential literature. Up to now, the courts did not have to deal with many cases regarding this issue. The Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency holds the view that the AGG provides protection from discrimination in the context of a medical treatment contract. We have compiled our arguments regarding this issue in our position paper no. 01 – 09/2020 “Ist das Allgemeine Gleichbehandlungsgesetz auf medizinische Behandlungsverträge anwendbar?“ (Can the General Equal Treatment Act be applied to medical treatment contracts).

The protection under the AGG also applies if the treatment is to be performed in a private clinic. That is because the freedom of a clinic to decide with whom to conclude a treatment contract is restricted by the AGG’s protection against discrimination.

According to the AGG, however, discrimination on account of a disability when seeing a doctor may be justified by objective reasons. That may be the case, for instance, if the discriminatory measure serves to avoid danger or prevent damage. One example might be that a doctor refuses to treat patients with HIV or only offers them appointments at the end of their office hours, stating as a reason that they wish to protect their staff or other patients from infection. As a rule, however, the protection from infection is no reason to justify discrimination against HIV-positive patients. That is because the same steps have to be taken for all patients to prevent the transmission of disease during healthcare and treatment – such as wearing disposable gloves or disinfecting certain surfaces. Since many people do not know of their infections or do not report them due to negative experience on earlier doctors’ visits, all patients must be treated as if they were contagious. Beyond that, no specific hygiene or occupational safety measures are required when treating patients with HIV. Discriminatory measures such as only offering treatment at the end of the office hours and arguing that after the visit, a more thorough disinfection of all surfaces or special treatment of the equipment used was necessary, cannot be objectively justified.

This clarification is based on the information provided by the German Dental Association on the treatment of patients with HIV in German, which you can find here and here. This information is also applicable to other types of medical treatment.

What you need to bear in mind if you wish to sue

If you wish to take legal action against discrimination because of an HIV infection, you must, as a first step, inform the clinic or doctors’ surgery of your claims in writing within two months of the discriminatory incident and collect circumstantial evidence of discrimination. For detailed information on possible legal steps to take, see the answers under “8. Legal steps against discrimination regarding the conclusion of contracts”.

For information on additional support services, check the answer to question “6.4 Where can I find additional support if I was discriminated against when seeing a doctor?”.

If you are discriminated against by a doctor because of your German language skills, this may constitute a breach of the discrimination ban laid down in the AGG. Although the AGG does not provide direct protection from discrimination on account of language, such discrimination falls under the protection against discrimination on the ground of ethnic origin.

Discrimination on account of ethnic origin or racist/anti-Semitic attributions in the context of medical treatment are prohibited under the AGG.

The AGG does not allow for any justification of discrimination on account of ethnic origin or for racist/anti-Semitic reasons. Pursuant to sections 630c (2) and 630e of the German Civil Code (BGB), however, doctors are required to inform their patients in a manner they can understand. If that was not possible without an interpreter, the refusal of treatment might therefore potentially be objectively justified.

What you need to bear in mind if you wish to sue

If you wish to take legal action against discrimination on account of your ethnic origin or for racist/anti-Semitic reasons during a doctors’ visit, you must, as a first step, inform the doctors’ surgery of your claims in writing within two months of the discriminatory incident and collect circumstantial evidence of discrimination. For detailed information on possible legal steps to take, see the answers under “8. Legal steps against discrimination regarding the conclusion of contracts”.

For information on additional support services, check the answer to question “6.4 Where can I find additional support if I was discriminated against when seeing a doctor?”.

If you wish to fight back against discrimination when seeing a doctor, you can also contact the Medical Association or the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians of your Federal Land.

For more information about your rights as a patient, you can also seek advice from the unabhängige Patientenberatung (independent patient consultation services). At the moment, however, the page is temporarily not available. Until the new Stiftung Unabhängige Patientenberatung Deutschland (German foundation for independent patient consultations) is established, you can contact, for instance, the citizens’ hotline at the Federal Ministry of Health:

https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/service/buergertelefon

If the bouncer did not let you into a club for racist/anti-Semitic reasons, this is a breach of the discrimination ban laid down in the AGG.

One example of such a violation would be if the staff at the door sent you away because of your skin colour or accent.

In principle, club operators have domestic authority, i.e., they can decide, which people may enter their club. For instance, they can set requirements regarding the type of clothing to be worn, the code of conduct to be followed or the type of clients to be addressed. People who are drunk or show aggressive behaviour may, of course, be denied entry. However, a club may not reject people directly or indirectly because of their ethnic origin or for racist/anti-Semitic reasons – the AGG’s protection against discrimination applies in this case. Since the AGG entered into force in 2006, there have been many successful lawsuits against racist discrimination at club entries. On average, those affected were granted pain and suffering damages between 300 and a maximum of 2.000 euros.
The court can also require the club operator to no longer reject without reason the person taking legal action.

What you need to bear in mind if you wish to sue

If you wish to take legal action against racial discrimination at the entry of a club, you must, as a first step, inform the club of your claims in writing within two months of the discriminatory denial of access and collect circumstantial evidence of discrimination – for instance, by talking to people who witnessed that you were rejected and for which reasons.

For detailed information on possible legal steps to take, see the answers under “8. Legal steps against discrimination regarding the conclusion of contracts”.

If a bank denies you the conclusion of a loan contract directly or indirectly because of your age, whether or not this falls under the AGG’s protection against discrimination depends on the kind of credit transaction concerned.

In the field of goods and services, specific types of contract are covered by the AGG’s protection against discrimination. In principle, the AGG’s protection only covers what is known as bulk business transactions. Generally, bulk business transactions include daily-life contracts, such as shopping at a supermarket or online store, visiting a restaurant, cinema, theatre, concert or swimming pool or using public transport. In these contracts, the question of who is the other contractual party does not play an important role for a service or product provider when it comes to concluding the agreement. The products or services concerned are offered on a standardised basis. This kind of contract is basically concluded with any customer willing to pay.

Since, however, most loan contracts are based on an individual risk assessment, the individual qualities of a potential contractual party – especially their creditworthiness – typically play a relevant role for the conclusion of the contract. Therefore, many credit transactions do not constitute bulk business transactions within the meaning of the AGG so that consequently, the AGG’s protection against discrimination does not apply in these cases. The situation may be different with standardised credit transactions, such as opening a standard current account. The Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency holds the view that consumer credits constitute bulk business transactions. Whether this is the case, however, has not yet been definitively clarified under legal aspects so that in case of legal action, a certain risk remains.please see the study “Altersdiskriminierung bei der Kreditvergabe” (Age discrimination in lending – only available in German), which was conducted by the Hamburger Institut für Finanzdienstleistungen (IFF) and funded by the Anti-Discrimination Agency.

What you need to bear in mind if you wish to sue

If you wish to take legal action for having been denied a loan contract because of your age, you must, as a first step, inform the bank of your claims in writing within two months of the rejection and collect circumstantial evidence of discrimination.

For detailed information on possible legal steps to take, see the answers under “8. Legal steps against discrimination regarding the conclusion of contracts”.

In the case of undue discrimination, you can assert claims for damages and compensation vis-a-vis the other contractual party pursuant to section 21 (2) of the AGG. In addition, pursuant to section 21 (1), you can demand that the discrimination be ceased or abstained from in the future.

The other contractual party must be informed of the claims within two months of the discriminatory event. This is stipulated in section 21 (5) of the AGG. If through no fault of your own, you only belatedly learn of the discrimination, the two-months deadline starts at the time you become aware of it. To ensure provability, the claims should be asserted in writing. You can use our template and completing instructions to help formulate a letter to assert your claims.

After you asserted your claims within a period of two months, you can file a lawsuit. There is no special deadline to be met if you wish to sue. Only when the claims have expired after the usual limitation periods – i.e., usually after three years – they can no longer be brought before a court.

It has not yet been clarified under legal aspects, whether an entitlement to the conclusion of a contract may arise from section 21 of the AGG. The Anti-Discrimination Agency considers this to be the case. For further information on our view, please see our  “position paper no. 03 – 12/2021 Besteht bei Verletzung des zivilrechtlichen Benachteiligungsverbots ein Anspruch auf Vertragsschluss?” (Does a violation of the discrimination ban in civil law result in an entitlement to the conclusion of a contract? – only available in German). However, asserting such a claim before a court is a high-risk endeavour since there is currently no settled case-law on this issue.

If you believe you have been discriminated against on account of a protected characteristic such as your religion or gender or for racist/anti-Semitic reasons, you must, as a first step in court, list specific reasons why. You need to present some form of proof indicating an act of discrimination has taken place.

That means, there must be indications for you having been rejected on account of a protected characteristic and not for other reasons. If there is such proof, then the other contractual party must demonstrate in court that discrimination did not in fact take place.

Indicators that may suggest discrimination include incorrect, changing or contradictory reasons for discriminatory treatment or the result of what is known as a testing procedure. The accounts of witnesses or correspondence that provide indications of this instance of discrimination can help to make a case in court. Therefore, you should talk to people who have witnessed the discriminatory event or collect letters and emails relating to the discrimination.

 

If you sue against discrimination regarding the conclusion of a contract and win the case, the court will require the opposing party to cease or abstain from the discrimination. You might also receive financial compensation for pecuniary losses, i.e. damages or compensation -as a form of pain and suffering damages for the violation of your personal rights that you have suffered.

Lawyers specialised in anti-discrimination law can help ascertain a lawsuit’s likelihood of success. In order to finance a consultation, people with low income and few savings can apply for a certificate entitling them to advisory assistance (Beratungshilfeschein). You can do this at the Local Court (Amtsgericht) for your area. You can find more information in the Federal Ministry of Justice’s flier on “Financial aid for legal advice and court costs” (legal advice and legal aid).

Even without professional legal assistance, it is possible to take legal action against discrimination. Here the legal application office (Rechtsantragstelle) at the Local Court with jurisdiction in your area will support you free of charge. However, if you wish to assert a claim for damages or compensation of more than 5.000 euros, this generally falls within the jurisdiction of the Regional Court (Landgericht). At these courts, legal representation by a lawyer is always mandatory (Anwaltszwang).

If you wish to take legal action, we also recommend you to get in touch with a local consultation agency, which can support you during legal proceedings should the need arise. Please check our map of consultation agencies to find a consultation agency in your area.