Increasing the efficiency of the General Equal Treatment Act: an economic analysis
| Author | Hartmut H Frenzel |
| DOI | 10.1177/1358229111420520 |
| Date | 01 September 2011 |
| Published date | 01 September 2011 |
Increasing the efficiency
of the General Equal
Treatment Act: an
economic analysis
Hartmut H Frenzel
Abstract
This paper examines the verdict in the case of Mrs Sule Eisele Gaffaroglu vRþV Lebens-
versicherungs AG, Wiesbaden Labour Court. The economic analysis of law focuses on the
three main paragraphs of the General Equal Treatment Act
1
(Allgemeines Gleichbe-
handlungsgesetz, abbreviated to AGG): §22 – Burden of proof for the plaintiff and
reversing the onus of proof to the defendant; §15 Para. 1 – Compensation of material
losses; and §15 Para. 2 – Monetary compensation for non-economic loss. The analysis of
the verdict concludes that the AGG, in the version currently in force, is not efficient.
However, this paper also suggests possible ways of increasing the efficiency of the AGG.
Keywords
General Equal Treatment Act, law and economics, anti-discrimination, damage-
compensation, compensation for non-economic-loss, labour law
Introduction and definition of the problem
This paper provides an economic analysis of law of the decision in the case of Mrs
Sule Eisele-Gaffaroglu v RþV Lebensversicherungs AG (Refs: ArbG Wiesbaden. Az
5 Ca 46/08), Wiesbaden Labour Court.
2
What is the purpose of analysing and commenting on a verdict from the perspective of
law and economics? This verdict lends itself particularly well to a scientific discussion
UMIT – The University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall, Austria
Corresponding author:
Email: hartmut.frenzel@umit.at
International Journalof
Discrimination and theLaw
11(3) 109–122
ªThe Author(s) 2011
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1358229111420520
ijdl.sagepub.com
To continue reading
Request your trial