A claim for the provision of a copy of e-mails is not sufficiently specific within the meaning of section 253 (2) no. 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. § Section 253 (2) no. 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO) if the e-mails of which a copy is to be provided are not designated so precisely that it is undoubted in the enforcement proceedings to which e-mails the conviction relates.
The plaintiff was employed by the defendant as a commercial lawyer from 1 to 31 January 2019. In his action, he requested, inter alia, information about his personal data processed by the defendant and the provision of a copy of these data pursuant to Article 15(3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (General Data Protection Regulation; hereinafter DSGVO). After the defendant provided the plaintiff with information, the parties declared the legal dispute to be settled in this respect.
The Labour Court dismissed the action for a copy of the plaintiff's personal data. The Regional Labour Court granted the application in part and dismissed it in all other respects. It held that the plaintiff was entitled to a copy of his personal data which had been the subject of the defendant's information, but not to the additional copies of his email correspondence and the emails which mentioned him by name.
The plaintiff's appeal against the partial dismissal of his action was unsuccessful before the Second Senate of the Federal Labour Court. The Senate could leave open whether the right to be provided with a copy pursuant to Art. 15 para. 3 GDPR can include the provision of a copy of e-mails. In any case, such a claim assumed in favour of the plaintiff must either be associated with an iSv. In any case, such a claim assumed in favour of the plaintiff must either be asserted in court with a sufficiently specific claim pursuant to § 253 para. 2 no. 2 ZPO or, if this is not possible, by way of a step-by-step action pursuant to § 254 ZPO. This was lacking here. If the defendant were ordered to provide a copy of the plaintiff's email correspondence as well as emails that mention him by name, it would remain unclear which emails the defendant would have to provide copies of. The subject of the conviction would be the performance of an unjustifiable act within the meaning of § 888 ZPO. § The subject of the order would be the performance of an unjustifiable act within the meaning of section 888 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for which enforcement law does not provide that the debtor would have to affirm in lieu of an oath that he has performed it in full.
Federal Labour Court, Judgment of 27 April 2021 - 2 AZR 342/20 -
Previous instance: Lower Saxony Regional Labour Court, Judgment of 9 June 2020 - 9 Sa 608/19 -
Source: Press release of the Federal Labour Court of 27.04.2021