The Bundesgerichtshof (BGH) has again granted a clear rejection in a new ruling by the assertion of warranty rights for black work. The Supreme Court has set itself apart again in a case with the question whether there is the possibility for black work to determine the plant operator to a subsequent performance. The case: A client was a paving his driveway of the estate in order. It also had the agreement in bar to pass the factory wage. In cash means without invoice or the identification of the applicable value added tax (VAT).

in this way the customer wanted to save 19% of the total. The contractor did the work. However, the result displeased the contracting authority. He classified it as flawed and demanded by the works contractor deficiencies to be rectified. The defect represents a measure of rectification. Read additional details here: Ripple.

In principle, the entrepreneur must rework his work at defectiveness. The operator has the right to select the type of repair patching the deficiency or newly establishes the work. The contracting authority then complained before the District Court, which gave him right and condemned the contractor for payment of the relevant advance of costs in the amount of the deficiency removal costs. The contractors rose appeals to the Court of appeal, which rejected the appeal. But the Supreme Court saw it differently. For the first time the Supreme Court could address fighting black labour law. This is section 1 II Nr. 2 to that cause contracts in breach of a nullity of the contract. Besides the entrepreneurs committed by black working, a tax evasion. However, the client loses its contractual claims for vain contract, because they need a contractual basis. As a conclusion it can be said that moonlighting pays for no page here. the customer shall bear the costs of the Court and has a poor plant design. The contractor has committed a flagrant offence in the form of a tax evasion.

New judgment to the Landesarbeitsgericht ensures clarity as long as to principal and contractor agree, take over independent like to freelance work for changing companies. It comes to the dispute over the nature of the business relationship, but can cause serious consequences. Virgin Airlines may not feel the same. On the safe side, it is therefore who informed prior to a contract for the legal framework of its activities as a freelancer. When freelancers and self-employed entrepreneurs provide services for third parties and those customers pay the self-employed for the work they have done, both are automatically in a legally binding contract. But where exactly? Here are the limits of fluent, explains Lutz Groot Bramel, Managing Director of the insurance broker specialised in freelance and self-employed entrepreneurs gb.online gmbh: A distinguishing criterion formulated aims of the Treaty. A concrete success is sought, for example, the development and implementation of a Computer program and the contractor determines how he fulfills the contract, so it is a work contract.

If the target is only the fulfillment of an activity at the or the provision of services to the customers, one speaks of a service contract.” Here, it is essential that the contractor owes not a concrete success, but only a particular activity the customer in a service contract. Quite different the situation is, if the Freelancer or his staff at the customer site will be active. Here, the suspicion of temporary work and thus a license contract is close quickly. Most important criterion for the detection of such license agreement is the question of whether the service provider in the customer operations is incorporated and whether he gets employment instructions directly from the customer. In this case, the presumption is close, that here is a self-employed as employees of the client company working without being hired there. The problem is, it don’t care about the courts as the contractual agreement is between two parties, but will be lived as the actual employment relationship “, explains Lutz Groot Bramel. The National Labor Court Baden-Wurttemberg has made a landmark judgment in August 2013 to this question which will be decisive in assessing similar contractual relationships between freelancers and their clients in the future. It is advisable therefore to undergo the scrutiny’s own working conditions and, where appropriate, with the principal to negotiate changes, in order to avoid the accusation of bogus contracts and of self-employment. The media spokesman of the Landesarbeitsgericht BW, Ulrich Hensinger answers questions about this ruling and its consequences, see.