TERMINATION OF CHURCH OFFICERS for adultery: COURTS HAVE BETWEEN BOTH PARTIES RIGHTS AND DUTIES BALANCING ACCOUNT
bicameral judgments in Cases: fruit against Germany (Beschwerde-Nr. 425/03) and Schüth v. Germany (Application no . 1620/03)
summary of the facts
Both cases involved the termination of employment by a religious employer because of an extramarital relationship of the employee. The Court dealt first with the dismissal of church employee because of actions attributable to the private lives.
Michael Obst is a German national, born in 1959, and lives in Neu-Anspach. He grew up a Mormon and married in 1980 in accordance with this belief. After a series of activities in the Mormon Church, he in 1986 became the area director of public relations for Europe. In early December 1993, he turned to ask for advice to its competent minister and confided to him that going downhill for years with his marriage and he an extramarital relationship with another Woman had, following the advice of the pastor, he finally spoke with his superiors on the matter. This few days later informed him about his dismissal. Mr. Fruit was later excommunicated in an internal disciplinary proceedings.
Mr. Fruit complained before the Labour Court in Frankfurt against his dismissal, the Court by order of January 1995 as invalid. That court upheld the decision Hessen first raised it to the Federal Labour Court, however, and remanded the case. According to the Federal Labour Court Lord had violated the fruit resulting from his employment duties. The court also referred on a policy decision by the Constitutional Court of 4 June 1985 Effectiveness of church staff layoffs due to injury of loyalty obligations. Religious employers would have the right to regulate labor relations independently, labor courts are, however, the religious and moral standards of the churches only to the extent that these are in inconsistent with the principles of law were in conflict. Demanded by the Mormon church obligation to marital fidelity is contrary to the law but not because of marriage in the German Basic Law also play a prominent role to come. The dismissal was for the church have been necessary to preserve its credibility, which had been given by Mr Obst responsibilities as area director of public relations for Europe in question. Moreover, the church was not required to issue a prior warning, as did Lord fruit in view of his long career working for the Church of the seriousness of his misconduct must be aware of. After the remand the Regional Labour Court dismissed the complaint from Mr Obst in January 1998.
was an appeal to the Federal Labour Court without success. In June 2002 the Federal Constitutional Court ruled, citing its landmark decision of 4 June 1985, not the constitutional complaint Mr. Obst's assume for a decision.
Schüth Bernhard is a German National, born in 1957, and lives in Essen. It was the mid-1980s, the Catholic parish of St. Lambertus in Essen hired as organist and choir director, as he separated from his wife in 1994. From 1995 on he lived with his new partner. After his children in kindergarten had said that Mr. Schüth be a father again, would the dean of the congregation led in July 1997 for an interview with him. A few days later, said the congregation his resignation, with effect from April 1998 because he violated the constitution of the Catholic Church for the church service as part of church work conditions. As he closed the outside of him Marriage to another woman lived, he was expecting a child, he had committed not only adultery, but also guilty of bigamy.
Mr. Schüth complained before the Labour Court against eating his dismissal, the Court by order of December 1997 as invalid. That court Dusseldorf upheld the decision at first, but the Federal Labor Court reversed the decision and remanded the case. According to the Federal Labour Court would have the country's labor court must consult the Dean of the municipality to determine whether he had tried in person, Mr. Schüth terminating his extramarital relationship to move. As with fruit, the court referred to the landmark ruling of the Constitutional Court, emphasizing that a demand by the Catholic Church is not required to conjugal fidelity of the law disagree. After
had referred back to the State Labor Court dismissed Mr Schüth off in February 2000. It found that maintaining the dean in the face of the Lord's determination Schüth, his new relationship, I can reasonably assume that a warning was unnecessary. The Court considers that the community does not have Mr. Schüth without losing all credibility deal further, as its activities in close connection with the church Mission had stood.
was an appeal to the Federal Labour Court without success. In July 2002 the Federal Constitutional Court ruled, citing its landmark decision of 4 June 1985, the Constitution does not appeal the decision to accept Mr Schüth.
complaint procedure and composition of the Court
Relying on Article 8 both complainants complained about the refusal of the German labor courts to set aside her dismissal.
The complaint Mr. Obst was on 2 January 2003, filed the complaint Mr Schüth on 11 January 2003 at the European Court of Human Rights. In the case of fruit was the Mormon church, in the case Schüth the Catholic Diocese of food from a third party a written statement.
Judgement was given by a Chamber of seven judges, which is composed as follows:
Peer Lorenzen (Denmark), President, Renate Jaeger (Germany), Rait Maruste (Estonia), Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre (Monaco), Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska ("the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia"), Zdravka Kalaydjieva (Bulgaria), Ganna Yudkivska (Ukraine), judges, and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Chancellor.
decision of the Court
In both cases, the Court was required to act on whether the German labor courts made a balance between the applicants' right to respect for his private and family life under Article 8 on the one hand, and the Convention rights of the Catholic Church and the Mormon church the other hand, the complainants had provided adequate protection against dismissal. The Court stressed that the autonomy of religious communities against undue government interference under Article 9 (freedom of religion) and Article 11 (freedom of association) was protected.
with his work for justice and a fuller review of their decisions have the Constitutional Court of Germany in principle positive Obligation of the state against plaintiffs in employment law disputes. In the two cases, the complainant had lodged a complaint before an employment tribunal which was empowered to decide on the effectiveness of its termination under state labor law in the light of the Church's labor law. In both cases, the Federal Labour Court had come to the conclusion that non of the Mormon Church and the Catholic Church called for the legal obligation of marital fidelity contrary.
The Court noted that the German labor courts in the case of fruit taken into account all relevant aspects of the case and a careful balancing of interests had made. They had found that the Mormon Church was added only be in a position to terminate Mr. fruits due to adultery, that he had informed the church about its own initiative. According to the German courts was his dismissal of a necessary action immediately to preserve the credibility of the Church, highlighted in particular in view of his position. Furthermore, the courts had been received as to why the church was not required to issue a prior warning, and they stressed that the damage to Mr. Fruit of the termination, among other things, given his relatively young age was limited.
The fact that the German courts had the interests of the Mormon Church after careful consideration given more weight than those of Mr. Obst, was not in conflict with the Convention. The Court found the conclusion of the German courts to understand that the Mormon Church had imposed on Mr. Fruit no unacceptable obligations. Since he was raised as a Mormon, he was complaining about was aware or should it be, should had the importance of marital fidelity to his employer and that his extramarital relationship is incompatible with the increased loyalty duties as Director of Public Relations for Europe was.
In contrast, perceived the Court in the case Schüth, it's that the country's labor court was limited to determine that he was organist and choir director, not in the group of people fell to their termination was in the case of serious misconduct, necessarily, such as those in pastoral and clerical occupations and in management positions, but that its activity was still so closely associated with the mission of the Catholic Church that they employ him could not further without losing all credibility. That court had not elaborated this argument, but seemed merely the opinion of the Church's employer to have played in this matter.
addition had the labor courts, the de facto family life Lord Schüth or protection is not even mentioned. The interests of the Church's employer had not therefore be weighed against Mr Schüth right to respect for his private and family life, but only against his interest to keep his job. A more thorough examination would be in balancing the competing rights and interests have been appropriate.
Although the Court recognized that Mr. Schüth, as he had signed his contract, made in relation to the Catholic Church was a loyalty obligation, which restricted his right to respect for private life, to some extent. His signing of the contract could not be understood as a clear promise to lead in case of separation or divorce abstemious life. The German labor courts had hardly taken into account that there had been no media coverage of his case and that, after 14 years of serving the community, the position of the Catholic Church had apparently not been challenged.
The fact that an employer terminated by a church employee had only limited opportunities to find a new job was, in the opinion of the Court is of particular importance. This was especially true if the dismissed employee had a specific skill that will enable him difficult or even impossible, to find a new job outside the church, as in the case of Mr Schüth, now pursued a part-time employment in a Protestant church. In this context, the Court noted that legislation would provide for the Evangelical Church for the employment of members of the Church that they could be employed only in exceptional cases and only in the context of additional employment.
The Court held that the balancing of the German labor courts between the rights of the church where Mr Schüth and employer had not been made in accordance with the Convention.
The Court reached a unanimous to the conclusion that the windfall was no violation of Article 8 was present and that if Schüth a violation of Article 8 was present.
Just satisfaction
The Court held that the question of the application of Article 41 (just satisfaction) in the case Schüth not yet ripe for a decision was and will be decided at a later date would be. The parties have an opportunity to get within three months following delivery of opinion on a related agreement.
(Press release from the Registrar of the ECHR of 09.23.2010)
0 comments:
Post a Comment