The Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) has ruled that the order for a judge in Lower Saxony to undergo a medical examination by a public health officer was unfounded. It infringed the claimant’s right to privacy (Ref.: 2 BvR 36/26 of 9 July 2026). The judge’s constitutional complaint was therefore upheld. In the Urgent proceedings The Federal Constitutional Court had already provisionally halted the investigation back in January 2026.

The Federal Constitutional Court criticised the fact that the severity of the infringement of the right to privacy had not been taken into account and that the decisions of the lower courts contained further shortcomings. As the court further explained, in the case of orders for medical examinations by a public health officer, there must be grounds for concern – based on a „reasonable, realistic assessment“ – that the civil servant in question is unfit for duty. The order must contain factual findings which make incapacity for duty appear plausible. That was not the case here.

The judge had repeatedly expressed her fear of being transferred to another court in emails, some of which were quite emotional. Her superiors had doubts about her fitness for duty due to her behaviour and ordered a medical examination. The judge sought to prevent this through the courts – initially without success before the administrative courts.