No chance with "Waseem" – but with "Schneider" you do
Humaira Waseem wanted to find a new apartment for herself and her family. When she discovered a promising advertisement in Groß-Gerau, she responded—politely, friendly, with all the necessary information. Just minutes later, she received a rejection: no more viewing appointments available.
It's just strange that shortly afterwards she makes the same request under the name Julia Schneider – with exactly the same details. This time, an appointment is possible. Coincidence? Hardly. For Waseem, it's clear: her name was the obstacle.
Discrimination or discretionary power?
The teacher refuses to accept this and does what many would not dare to do: she conducts a so-called test—a method recommended by the Anti-Discrimination Agency. Several inquiries, same profile, only the name changes. The result is clear: "German" names get appointments, foreign-sounding names do not.
She then takes the matter to court—and wins her case at the Darmstadt Regional Court. The court finds it proven that she was discriminated against because of her Pakistani name. The real estate agent was unable to plausibly explain why there were no more appointments available for these particular inquiries.
But the broker is not giving in and is appealing the decision. The case is now before the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) – and could clarify fundamental issues that have significance beyond this individual case.
Two big questions for the Supreme Civil Court
The proceedings before the Federal Court of Justice essentially concern two points:
- Can "testing" even be used as evidence in court?
- Can a real estate agent be held personally liable—or only the landlord?
The judges make it clear: yes, testing counts. It is a permissible means of exposing discrimination—including from a legal perspective. And: the real estate agent could well be the right person to take legal action against.
The presiding judge literally called real estate agents "gatekeepers" in the housing market. Anyone who is not allowed through will not even get to the landlord. If real estate agents were allowed to discriminate without being held liable, this would undermine the basic principle of the General Equal Treatment Act (AGG).
Why the ruling changes more than just a single case
If the Federal Court of Justice follows the regional court's ruling, it would send a strong signal to all apartment seekers with a migrant background. It would be the first time that the highest court has confirmed that discrimination by real estate agents is not only morally reprehensible—it is also legally actionable and subject to damages.
At the same time, it would send a clear message to the real estate industry, which has too often been able to hide behind vague phrases such as "already allocated" or "high demand."
Studies show that anyone whose name isn't "Max Müller" has a harder time—especially if their surname sounds Muslim or African. The fact that responsibility for this cannot simply be passed on would be a long-overdue sign of equal opportunities in the housing market.
Critical evaluation
Discrimination doesn't just happen when signing a lease—it starts on the way there. Real estate agents who think they can filter names like spam emails are in the wrong job. If access to housing depends on the sound of someone's last name, we don't have a real estate problem—we have a democracy problem. A ruling with attitude is therefore more than appropriate.
Source: tagesschau.de
Do you have questions about the new Federal Court of Justice ruling and your rights when looking for an apartment? Contact us immediately to receive legal assistance!
to the lawyerAt a fixed price of 169 EURO (gross)
