Removal of photos from a school yearbook

The VG Koblenz had to clarify the question in a lawsuit whether a teacher can demand that a teacher

- to recall all to recall all distributed and sold copies of the 2015/2016 yearbook,

- in to make his or her photo unrecognisable in all copies of the 2015/2016 yearbook and and

- prohibit the prohibit the future distribution of the 2015/2016 yearbook with its photograph

What was the occasion?

The plaintiff is a teacher in the service of the Rhineland-Palatinate at a grammar school. In the 2015/2016 school year (as in the previous year), this school year before) with photos of all classes and the respective teachers. teachers. At the photo session, the plaintiff also allowed himself to be (co-)photographed. photographed. His photo then appeared on two pages of the printed yearbook. yearbook. The school only had a certain number of yearbooks printed after a request to the after a request for copies from the pupils. All copies were sold.

Initially, the plaintiff demanded out of court unsuccessfully for the yearbooks to be recalled, for his person to be made unrecognisable in the two photographs and to cease and desist from further distribution of the yearbooks.

In his action before the Koblenz Administrative Court, the plaintiff pursued his continued to pursue his claims. He argued that the photos infringed his right to a name his right to his name, his right to his own image and his general right to right of personality. He had been persuaded to take part in the he had been persuaded by a colleague. He had not known the true purpose of the photos. known. Moreover, the photographer had assured him that the photos would not be published. photographs would not be published, so that there was no consent for the publication of the photos in the yearbook.

What was the decision of the VG Koblenz?

The VG Koblenz dismissed the action on the following grounds dismissed:

An encroachment on the rights of the plaintiff does not exist

In the opinion of the VG Koblenz, the plaintiff's consent was not required. consent of the plaintiff. And even if such consent had been required the plaintiff would have given it by conclusive behaviour.

Pursuant to § 23 para. 1 no. 1 KUG, no consent was consent was not required, because the class photographs complained of by the plaintiff of contemporary history and there were no interests of the plaintiff which were particularly of the plaintiff pursuant to § 23 (2) KUG did not exist.

The concept of current affairs includes all issues of general social interest, including events of only regional or local regional or local significance. Yearbooks with class photos are in any case of local social significance for the members of the school. The plaintiff is only affected in the so-called social sphere, because the photos were the photos were taken in the official sphere and show the plaintiff in a completely innocuous situation, posed situation. This impairment of his social sphere is secondary to the interests of the school in the publication of his photographs. photos.

Moreover, the plaintiff had conclusively consented to the publication of his the publication of his photos by allowing himself to be photographed at the photo session. the photo session. He should have known that the school had already used such photos in the had already used such photos for yearbooks in the past and that he should have publication. The photographer's assurance was irrelevant because the school alone decided whether to publish the photos. decided.

The claim would be impossible to realise

The plaintiff cannot demand the recall of the yearbooks and and discrediting of his photographs. It is unclear where exactly these exactly where they are. Moreover, the court does not see the defendant as having a claim against the owners of the yearbooks for their return. The court would give the The court would be imposing an impossible obligation on the defendant.

There is also no risk of repetition

The request for injunctive relief fails due to the necessary necessary risk of repetition. There is no threat of further publication of the plaintiff's photos of the plaintiff in a yearbook. All copies have been sold.

Source: Judgment of the Koblenz Administrative Court of 06.09.2019, ref. no. 5 K 101/19

GoldbergUllrich Attorneys at Law 2019

Julius Oberste-Dommes LL.M. (Information Law)

Lawyer and

Specialist lawyer for information technology law

Seal