According to § 130 BGB (German Civil Code), the sender of an e-mail bears the full burden of proof that the e-mail has reached the recipient. He does not benefit from the simplification of proof of the prima facie evidence by the fact that he does not receive a message about the undeliverability of the e-mail after it has been sent.<\/p>\n
There is a dispute between the parties as to whether the plaintiff is obligated to repay a loan granted to him to finance an advanced education in the amount of 60.000 euros to repay to the defendant.<\/p>\n
It was contractually agreed between the parties that the defendant would waive repayment of the loan if, for operational reasons, it did not offer the plaintiff a job within five years of completing the training program.<\/p>\n
Whether the plaintiff received an email from the defendant with an employment offer attached on the last day of the deadline was in dispute. The defendant referred to their outgoing and incoming mail account, according to which the email had been sent out<\/p>\n
and they did not receive a message of undeliverability. The plaintiff did not acknowledge receipt of such an email until three days later<\/p>\n
After an employment relationship was established between the parties, the defendant began to withhold 500 euros per month from the plaintiff's salary as loan repayment in each case. It considered that the plaintiff had been offered a job in time based on the email. The condition for the waiver of repayment had not occurred. They would be able to rely on prima facie evidence regarding the timely receipt of the email.<\/p>\n
After an out-of-court settlement was not possible, the plaintiff brought an action for performance before the Cologne Labor Court to recover the monthly deductions wrongly withheld for several months i.H.v. sue for 500 Euro each.<\/p>\n
With judgment of 18. March 2021, the Cologne Labor Court has upheld the wage payment claim. The defendant appealed the first-instance decision to the Cologne Regional Labor Court (LAG).<\/p>\n
The receipt of an e-mail, according to the Court of Appeals, must be presented and proven by the sender.<\/p>\n
The sending of the e-mail does not constitute prima facie evidence of receipt by the recipient. Whether after sending an e-mail the message arrives on the recipient's server is not certain. Just as with simple mail, it is technically possible that the message will not arrive. This risk could not be placed on the recipient. Since the sender chooses the method of transmission of the declaration of intent, he also bears the risk that the message does not arrive. In order to ensure that an e-mail has reached the addressee, the sender has the option of requesting a read confirmation via the options management of an e-mail program. However, the defendant has refrained from this.<\/p>\n
Since the defendant took over the plaintiff into an employment relationship a few days after the expiration of five years after completion of the advanced training, a waiver of the loan repayment had to be assumed. From this, according to the LAG, it follows that the defendant wrongfully withheld 500 euros each month as loan repayment.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
According to § 130 BGB (German Civil Code), the sender of an e-mail bears the full burden of proof that<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n