Traffic law ruling
Driving ban for field workers: When does particular hardship apply?
December 20, 2024, 3:46 p.m
Listen to article
This audio version was artificially generated. More info | Send feedback
Anyone who does not follow the rules in traffic must expect fines and driving bans. In special individual cases, the procedure may vary from the latter. However, they are rare.
There are only exceptions to driving bans in cases of extreme hardship. For example, if the punishment would endanger one's existence, mean the loss of one's job or an impairment of one's health or the care of relatives.
Strict requirements apply to such exceptions. For example, it is not sufficient if someone has remained inconspicuous in traffic to date. Work or family stress alone does not justify an exception either. This is shown by a decision (ref.: 2 ORbs 107/24) of the Brandenburg Higher Regional Court (OLG), to which the Working Group (AG) Traffic Law of the German Lawyers' Association (DAV) pointed out.
In this case, a man was driving far too fast outside of a built-up area. A measurement showed a speed limit of 47 km/h. This was followed by a fine of 320 euros and a one-month driving ban.
Speeder initially successfully appeals against driving ban
In particular, the man lodged an objection against the driving ban and was initially successful in the district court. The decision was made to increase the fine to 640 euros and, in particular, to waive the driving ban due to hardship. The person concerned claimed that he had overlooked the speed limit sign due to a momentary error.
In addition, as a customer advisor in the field, he relies on his car for work. In his eyes, public transport is not an alternative because he works in a rural region. He also cited family obligations: For example, he had to take the children to school every day.
The OLG overturns the judgment again
But the Brandenburg Higher Regional Court overturned the district court's decision after a legal complaint from the public prosecutor's office. The legal requirements are deemed not to have been met, which could result in the driving ban being waived. Clearly not enough to ensure that the man has not been conspicuous in traffic to date.
The Higher Regional Court also did not allow professional or family pressures alone to apply: a driving ban could only be waived in exceptional cases – for example if there was exceptional hardship that went beyond the usual disadvantages of a driving ban. The DAV cites examples of hardship cases such as a threat to one's existence, the loss of a job, impairment of health or the need to care for relatives.
However, in individual cases, just a month's driving ban may not be sufficient for an exception, even with reference to professional activity. The DAV continues that this period could also be bridged with vacation or temporary work in the office. It must be clearly shown that there is a risk of losing your job even if you are temporarily banned from driving.
