In this article I would like to Employment law attorney in Hamburg<\/a>, provide you with the best possible information on the topic of dismissal due to illness. You will receive information on, among other things,<\/p>\n\n\n\n A great deal of knowledge and care has gone into this article. I have researched numerous court rulings for you so that you can be as well informed as possible. I have provided links to all relevant court rulings. I invite you to read at least as far as the practical part. Then you will know what you should do next.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Have you received a notice of termination? We will fully support you in your termination process.<\/p>Yes, I need a lawyer for dismissal protection<\/a>\n <\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n Dismissal due to illness is a sub-case of ordinary dismissal for personal reasons. The employee is no longer able to perform the work required of him due to illness. You must always consider dismissal due to illness if the illness and the associated absences lead to significant impairment of the employer\u2019s operational or economic interests<\/strong> However, the illness itself is irrelevant if it has no impact on the workplace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Since dismissal due to illness is generally not a controllable situation, a previous Disciplinary warning<\/a> no requirement for effectiveness<\/strong> for dismissal due to illness. However, some lower courts have taken a different view when illnesses can be remedied through manageable behavior, such as taking medication.<\/p>\n\n\n\n LAG Hessen, judgment of 18.03.2014 \u2013 13 Sa 1207\/13<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Like dismissal for personal reasons, the effectiveness of dismissal for illness is also examined in three steps:<\/p>\n\n\n\n (1) Negative health prognosis:<\/strong> There must be a negative prognosis regarding the continued incapacity to work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (2) Significant impairment of business interests:<\/strong> The downtime and the downtime still to be expected must have a significant impact on operational interests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (3) Balancing of interests:<\/strong> In the context of a case-by-case balancing of interests, it must be examined whether the significant operational impairments result in a burden on the employer that can no longer be reasonably accepted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Questions and problems arise at each of the stages mentioned above regarding the validity of a dismissal due to illness. I will outline the most important legal requirements below.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For a dismissal due to illness to be valid, a negative health prognosis must first be established. The employer must conclude, based on objective facts, that the concern about further sickness absences to the extent currently expected is justified. <\/p>\n\n\n\n These objective facts are usually the Past illness<\/strong>, as the employer usually has no other data available. According to case law, past absences have no direct significance with regard to the negative health prognosis. However, they are Indicative effect for future forecasts<\/strong> to.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When assessing whether there is a negative health prognosis, case law distinguishes between<\/p>\n\n\n\n Even in the case of frequent short-term illnesses, objective facts must be present that allow the conclusion that illnesses will continue to occur in the future to the same extent. Short-term illnesses <\/strong>In recent years, a significant indication <\/strong>in the sense that a similar course of the disease can be expected in the future. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The employer meets its burden of explanation and proof in the process by presenting the periods of illness in the past and asserting that similar periods of illness are to be expected in the future. The employee must then prove, if necessary by releasing their doctor from their duty of confidentiality, why their health prognosis was positive at the time of termination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, the employer will not succeed with his dismissal on grounds of illness if the Diseases <\/strong>at the time of receipt of the notice of termination already healed<\/strong> were.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Even if these are not diseases that cause unique character<\/strong> The employer will not be successful in dismissing employees on the grounds of illness. The same applies to illnesses that are one-off causes<\/strong> such as a sports accident resulting in injury. one-off health damage<\/strong>, which may soon be remedied by surgery, do not justify dismissal on the grounds of illness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Federal Labor Court, judgment of November 20, 2014 \u2013 2 AZR 755\/13<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n On the other hand, it does not matter for the negative prognosis whether the diseases different causes of disease<\/strong> Here is the Federal Labor Court:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Even if the causes of illness are different, they can still indicate a general susceptibility to illness that is likely to persist. [...] This applies even if individual illnesses\u2014such as colds\u2014have been cured. The cessation of individual illnesses does not call into question the general susceptibility. The situation is different with absences based on a single event.<\/p>\nFederal Labor Court, judgment of November 20, 2014 \u2013 2 AZR 755\/13<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n In contrast to frequent short-term illnesses, the negative health prognosis in the case of a long-term illness is based on the duration of the illness. The employee must already ill for a long time<\/strong> The duration of the illness is an indication that the incapacity to work will continue in the future. The Federal Labor Court saw this as an indication in the case of an more than 20 months of continuous incapacity to work<\/strong> as given.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Uncertainty about the recovery of the ability to work is equivalent to a case of permanent incapacity to work if recovery is not expected in the next 24 months<\/strong> According to the Federal Labor Court, the employer may hire another employee on a fixed-term basis for a period of 24 months in accordance with Section 14, Paragraph 2, Sentence 1 of the TzBfG.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
Table of contents<\/h3>\n
\n
Examination: Dismissal of employees due to illness<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
In these cases there is a negative health prognosis<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Frequent short-term illness<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Long-term illness<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/smart-arbeitsrecht.de\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Raphael_Lugowski_Hamza_Guelbas_Anwaelte.webp\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n