Evidential value of the certificate of incapacity for work
If an employee falls ill and is unable to fulfill their work obligations, they do not have to attend work. Instead of actual wages, they continue to receive continued remuneration in the event of illness (Section 3 of the Continuation of Remuneration Act (EFZG)).
However, the employee must prove that they are unable to work due to illness. A medical certificate of incapacity for work is the most important evidence in this situation. The medical certificate serves as proof that an employee is “unfit for work due to illness” and of the duration of thereof.
A medical certificate has a very high evidential value. In fact, the evidential value of a medical certificate can only be challenged if the employer is capable of presenting reliable evidence against the illness and incapacity to work.
The doctor on medical leave in court
An orthopedic specialist and his former employer took their dispute before the Mecklenburg-Vorpommern State Labor Court. The doctor had terminated his employment contract. He then repeatedly fell ill during the six-month notice period. He fell ill again approximately three weeks before the end of the notice period, and canceled an official meeting as a result. However, he then spent approximately 10 hours traveling by train to his home in southern Germany the next day. He submitted a certificate of incapacity to work for his last three weeks of work, and then took his remaining leave until the end of the notice period.
The clinic management doubted that the man was truly unfit for work, and only paid him part of his final gross salary. After all, he was able to take a ten-hour train journey home while he was ill. Furthermore, the company regarded it as an astonishing coincidence that the medical certificate was issued in such a way that he was no longer required to come in to work, as it aligned perfectly with his remaining leave.
The doctor did not agree with this and sued his employer, demanding the unpaid part of his final salary.
Illness during the notice period is not automatically implausible
The doctor won the court case. The Mecklenburg-Vorpommern State Labor Court also took a different view to the employer.
Illness during the notice period does not automatically cast doubt on the credibility of the medical certificate. The same also applies to declining motivation at the end of the employment relationship.
Furthermore, the long train journey is not a reliable indicator that the medical certificate was not correct: The stress of a train journey is not even remotely comparable to the stress of working as a senior physician. The man had also been so seriously ill that hospitalization and other treatment had been necessary. Consequently, the journey home did not justify any conclusions regarding the presence or absence of the certified illness.
Due to the fact that the employer was unable to present any reliable evidence capable of casting serious doubt on the medical certificate, the court ruled in favor of the doctor. Therefore, the employer had to pay the former employee his full gross salary for the last month of his notice period as continued remuneration. (Mecklenburg-Vorpommern State Labor Court, decision dated July 13, 2023, Ref.: 5 Sa 1/23)
Summary of the key facts:
- The certificate of incapacity for work is the most important proof of incapacity for work pursuant to Section 3 of the Continuation of Remuneration Act (EFZG).
- An employer can only contest the evidential value of the medical certificate if they present reliable evidence against the employee’s illness.
- If the evidential value is contested and the employee cannot provide proof of their illness, the employee is not entitled to continued payment of remuneration.
