Since the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become common for employment contracts to provide for employees to work, at least partly, from home. More recently, however, many employers have sought to bring employees back into the office. This makes a recent decision of the Düsseldorf Labour Court (judgment of 11 February 2026, Case No. 3 Ca 6587/25) particularly noteworthy.
The case: IT employee had worked partly from home for years
The case concerned an IT employee who had been working partly from home for several years. His employer instructed him to work from the office four days a week, citing organisational shortcomings and communication problems within the department.
The employee disagreed and challenged the instruction in court, arguing that he was entitled to continue working from home.
The judgment: no right to work from home to a specific extent
The labour court took a different view. It held that the employee had no contractual entitlement to work from home for any particular number of days and that there was no other legal basis giving him a right to work remotely.
The court reached this conclusion for several reasons.
No Breach of the Principle of Equal Treatment
The principle of equal treatment requires any different treatment of employees to be objectively justified. In this case, no such justification had been demonstrated.
No Contractual Provision
The employee’s contract contained no clause granting a right to work from home.
Internal Policy Was Not Legally Binding
The employer’s published “Rules on Remote Working” did not create an enforceable entitlement. The court regarded the document merely as a general framework subject to management approval rather than a legally binding commitment.
No Established Company Practice
Nor had a binding company practice developed that could give rise to an entitlement to work from home. The repeated approval of homeworking by the employee’s line manager merely reflected the exercise of the employer’s managerial discretion and did not amount to a contractual promise.
Nevertheless: the employer’s instruction was invalid
Although the employee had no right to work from home, the court nevertheless ruled that the employer’s instruction requiring him to attend the office from Monday to Thursday was invalid.
The reason was that the instruction did not satisfy the legal requirements governing the proper exercise of the employer’s managerial prerogative.
Under german employment law, an employer’s right to issue instructions is subject to judicial review. Any instruction must be reasonable and reflect a fair balancing of the interests of both employer and employee. The burden of proving that this standard has been met rests with the employer.
In this case, the employer failed to meet that burden.
The company was unable to explain convincingly why requiring the employee to return to the office would resolve the alleged communication and organisational problems.
The court also noted that many of the employee’s key colleagues and contacts continued to work remotely. Requiring this particular employee to return to the office therefore appeared unlikely to achieve the stated objective of improving communication.
As a result, the instruction was held to be invalid because it was not supported by an adequate balancing of interests.
Conclusion: employers may end homeworking only under certain conditions
In summary, the court confirmed that employers may, in principle, restrict or end homeworking arrangements where employees have no contractual entitlement to work remotely.
However, any instruction requiring employees to return to the office must be objectively justified and capable of withstanding a proper balancing of interests.
The judgment confirms that employees do not have an automatic right to work from home. At the same time, employers cannot simply end remote working arrangements at will. Any requirement to return to the workplace must be supported by genuine business reasons and based on a transparent and proportionate assessment of the interests involved.
You may also wish to read our related article:
“Returning from homeworking to the office – what employers need to know”
Do you have questions about homeworking or employment law?
If you would like advice on this topic or on employment law generally, I would be pleased to assist you.
Please do not hesitate to get in touch. I look forward to helping you!
Yours sincerely,
Christian Seidel
Your ACCONSIS contact
Christian Seidel
Lawyer
Specialist in labour law
Authorised signatory of ACCONSIS
Service phone
+ 49 89 547143
or via email
c.seidel@acconsis.de
FAQ – answers to frequently asked questions about homeworking
1. Do employees have a legal right to work from home?
No. There is no general statutory right to work from home in Germany. However, such a right may arise under an employment contract, a works agreement or a collective bargaining agreement.
2. When is an instruction requiring an employee to return to the office invalid?
An instruction requiring an employee to return from homeworking to the office may be invalid if it is not supported by genuine business reasons or if the employer has failed to give proper consideration to the employee’s interests.
3. What did the Düsseldorf Labour Court decide about homeworking?
The Court confirmed that employers may generally end homeworking arrangements where there is no contractual entitlement. However, any requirement to return to the office must be proportionate, objectively justified and based on a proper balancing of interests.
