Reasonable grounds
Reasonable grounds exist where, at the time of the report, a whistleblower could reasonably believe—based on the circumstances known to them—that the reported information was true and concerned an actual breach.
In whistleblower protection law, the concept of reasonable grounds is the central requirement for a reporting person to enjoy statutory protection against retaliation. Under Section 33(1) no. 2 of the German Whistleblower Protection Act (HinSchG), protection is granted to anyone who, at the time of the report or disclosure, had reasonable grounds to believe that the reported information was true. What matters is therefore not the objective accuracy of the information, but the legitimate, good-faith conviction of the whistleblower based on the factual indications actually available to them.
The standard of assessment is objectified: the decisive question is whether a sensible person in the whistleblower's specific situation and with their level of knowledge would likewise have been entitled to consider the reported information true. Mere speculation without any factual basis or a vague sense of wrongdoing is not sufficient; conversely, the law does not require legally watertight proof. If information reported in good faith later turns out to be incorrect, protection is retained, provided that reasonable grounds existed at the time of the report.
Reasonable grounds must be distinguished from the deliberate or grossly negligent reporting of false information. Anyone who knowingly makes false or misleading statements is not acting in good faith, loses the protection of the Act, and may be liable to compensate the resulting damage under Section 38 HinSchG. The requirement of reasonable grounds thus strikes a balance: it lowers the threshold for legitimate reports by not demanding certainty, while at the same time protecting affected persons and companies from deliberately abusive or denunciatory accusations.
Legal Basis
Section 33(1) no. 2 HinSchG, Section 38 HinSchG, Art. 6(1)(a) EU Whistleblower Directive (Directive (EU) 2019/1937)
Practical Example
An accounting employee repeatedly notices invoices from a supplier with no identifiable service in return, all approved by her line manager. She reports a possible suspicion of corruption to the internal reporting office. Even if it later turns out that these were legitimate consultancy fees, her report is protected: given the unusual booking patterns, she could reasonably assume a breach had occurred. The compliance officer carefully documents this good faith in order to be able to substantiate the whistleblower's protection against retaliation vis-à-vis the manager concerned.