Exemption – home

PDF-Sönnichsen-Acquittal-Article

Article

Re: the Acquittal of Dr Sönnichsen for Issuing Vaccine Exemption Papers

Back to All Cases

Click the “View Fullscreen” button below to get full functionality in fullscreen.

Back to All Cases

Exemption Certificates Case

Exemption Certificates Case

Re: the Legality of a Medical Doctor Issuing Vaccination Exemption Certificates

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

Dates: Feb 9, 2023
Location: Salzburg, Austria
Court: Regional Court Salzburg
Case #: ?
Plaintiff: Public Prosecutor
Plaintiff’s Lawyer:

Defendant: Dr Andreas Sönnichsen
Trial Type: Criminal Complaint
Judge: ?
Status: Decided
Verdict: for the Defendant

*updated Feb 13, 2023

Background

Dr Andreas Sönnichsen, a German national, was employed as a teaching and research professor at the university hospital in Vienna from 2018 up to end of 2021 when he was fired from his position because of his fierce criticism of Corona vaccination policy. [1]

He was accused of having issued digital certificates for provisional vaccination incapacity against payment of 20 euros, although he was not authorized to do so. [1]

The Medical Association had seen the general practitioner’s actions as a violation of the Medical Act and reported this to the public prosecutor’s office. In the court hearing, he was accused of his opinions being issued via the internet without having conscientiously examined the patients in advance. [1]

He was also accused by defenders of the government and Corona policy Corona policy of being a “Schwurbler” (indiscriminate conspiracy theorist, lateral thinker etc). [1]

Significance

First legal case in Austria of a medical doctor found innocent of issuing vaccine exemption certificates.

Plaintiff’s (State Prosecutor’s) Argument

Dr Sönnlichen was further accused of issuing his expert opinions via the Internet without having conscientiously examined the patients beforehand. [1]

Defendant’s Argument

Sönnichsen protested his innocence in the trial. The judge could not recognize any subjective facts and no intent to enrich. [1]

Via his lawyer, Dr Sönnichsen argued [2] that he:

“…never committed fraud or abused his powers.” further stating that: “It is legal, that if people are afraid of having an allergic reaction to an untested vaccine, to issue them with a certificate [of vaccination exemption] up until the time that the ingredients and effects of this vaccine are clarified.”

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

A similar case was held in Germany where entrepreneur Markus Bönig was on trial for brokering “vaccination certificates” for a fee. [3]

in the view of the Lüneburg Regional Court, the vaccination certificate is not a health certificate at all, because it does not certify an individual state of health. “The ‘certificate’ is also not incorrect, since the statement made in it that no examination had taken place corresponds to the truth,” the court said. The extent to which the certificate is then useful in practice – for example, in the case of a workplace-based vaccination requirement – was not before the court.[3]
According to Bönig, the certificates are in any case simply expert opinions “which merely reflect what the user himself has stated, namely that he does not know at all whether he could react allergically or not.” This determination does not require personal contact with a doctor.[3]

Decision

The trial against the physician, university lecturer and well-known CoV vaccination critic Andreas Sönnichsen ended in Salzburg with an acquittal. [1]

Aftermath

After the acquittal, Sönnichsen strongly criticized the CoV policy. Those who had not been vaccinated had been severely defamed and discriminated against. [1]

He told ORF after the verdict was handed down that there was now a great deal of work to be done in society. [1]

He criticizes the fact that there is now a great silence – after many months of expensive media campaigns against the unvaccinated:

“I am very glad that Corona is now coming to an end. On the other hand, we now have to come to terms with the past. We now know that many political measures were completely inappropriate. It is now openly admitted that the kindergarten and school closures were unnecessary. Now two studies have come out that the mandatory masking was also unnecessary. The lockdowns certainly did more harm than good.” [1]

Of course, a lot was learned in this crisis, Sönnichsen said,

“But the people who predicted this, and I count myself among them, they were massively defamed and called right-wing radicals. I have never had any radical right-wing thoughts in my head. [1]

Further Research

Court Documents:

Read the Court Ruling

In the news:

Article from December 2021

Media

Interview -Jan 2023

source: ….

Interview -Sept 2022

source: ….

Sönnichsen describes his hearing in the Salzburg court -Feb 10 2023

source: shortXXvids

Back to All Cases

NorthShore Jab Mandate Case

NorthShore Jab Mandate Case

Re: the Legality of Mandating Experimental Injections as a Condition for Employment

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

Dates: October 2021
Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
Court: Federal Northern District Court of Illinois
Case #: 1:21-cv-05683
Plaintiffs: 500+ health care workers
Plaintiff’s Lawyer: Liberty Counsel

Defendant: NorthShore University HealthSystem
Trial Type: Class Action
Judge: John F. Kness
Status: Decided (Jul 29, 2022)
Verdict: for the Plaintiff

*updated Jan 08,2023

Background

The case centers around workers at NorthShore University HealthSystem, who filed a lawsuit in October 2021 claiming their employer illegally refused to grant any religious exemptions to a COVID-19 vaccine mandate. [2]

The Suit was initiated by 14 employees, including nurses, a pharmacy tech and a senior application analyst. They were named anonymously in the litigation. [6]

These healthcare employees said they were victims of religious discrimination, and were punished for their religious beliefs against taking an injection associated with aborted fetal cells. [4]

In October 2021, Liberty Counsel sent a demand letter to NorthShore on behalf of numerous health care workers who had sincere religious objections to NorthShore’s “Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination Policy.” If NorthShore had agreed then to follow the law and grant religious exemptions, the matter would have been quickly resolved and it would have cost it nothing. But, when NorthShore refused to follow the law, and instead denied all religious exemption and accommodation requests for employees working in its facilities, Liberty Counsel filed a class action lawsuit, along with a motion for a temporary restraining order and injunction. [3]

Northshore has estimated that it denied Religious exemption to 523 employees between July 1 2021- July 1 2022. 204 of the workers succumbed to the pressure and were jabbed. The other 269 were fired or resigned. [6]

The Plaintiff’s Lawyer Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver explained on “Fox & Friends” that NorthShore implemented a “jab or job” policy, meaning employees were required to get the vaccine or be terminated. [1]
“All of them were denied religious accommodations,” Staver told host Will Cain. “It was literally no religious accommodation, which they’re required to do under the federal employment law called Title VII.” [1]

Liberty Council

Liberty Counsel advances religious liberty, the sanctity of human life, and the family through litigation and education. (from their website) [3]

Staver said his group is not just limiting the battle over mandates to the Illinois health care workers, telling the Washington Examiner that Liberty Counsel is working for private sector employees in industries such as airlines and other health care systems. [3]

“We have been working with thousands of employees across the country,” he said. “Many of them face the same jab-or-job mandate that is that issue in NorthShore.” [3]

Significance

This is the first US classwide lawsuit for healthcare workers over a COVID shot mandate.

Liberty Counsel Vice President of Legal Affairs Horatio Mihet said in a statement that the settlement should “serve as a strong warning to employers across the nation that they cannot refuse to accommodate those with sincere religious objections to forced vaccination mandates.” [2]

“Let this case be a warning to employers that violated Title VII,” Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, the group behind the lawsuit, told the Washington Examiner. “It is especially significant and gratifying that this first classwide COVID settlement protects healthcare workers.” [3]

Plaintiff’s Argument

Staver explained that Title VII applies to both private and public employers and requires that sincere religious beliefs be accommodated. [1]

Title VII Explained . . .

This federal law, which applies to all 50 states and every American territory, requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for both legitimately-held religious beliefs and medical exemptions.

Straight out of 42 U.S. Code § 2000e-2, what you need to know is there in black and white:

“It shall be unlawful employment practice for an employer — (1) to fail or refuse to hire or discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; or (2) to limit, segregate, or classify his employees or applicants for employment in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex or national origin.” (emphasis added)

Religious exemptions should, and must be accommodated, under the law.

Additionally, Title VII’s protections extend to nonreligious beliefs if related to morality, and ultimate ideas about life, purpose and death.

Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…

Decision

NorthShore will be required to pay $10.3 million to employees who were denied religious exemptions. [1]

Anyone fired because of their refusal to get the jab will also be eligible for reemployment in the system. [2]

U.S. District Judge John Kness, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, approved the settlement and appeared to side with Liberty Council’s claim that the mandate violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. [2]

The settlement must be approved by the federal District Court. Employees of NorthShore who were denied religious exemptions will receive notice of the settlement, and will have an opportunity to comment, object, request to opt out, or submit a claim form for payment out of the settlement fund, all in accordance with deadlines that will be set by the court. [3]

Compensation Agreement

NorthShore employees who were terminated or forced to resign will receive $25,000 and those who were forced to get the vaccine will receive $3,000 as part of the settlement. [1]

The settlement approved in the Illinois Northern District Court will result in 473 employees of the system becoming eligible for compensation for being denied a religious exemption to the vaccine mandate, with any of those fired as a result of the rules being eligible for $25,000. [2]

The 13 healthcare workers who are lead plaintiffs in the lawsuit will receive an additional approximate payment of $20,000 each for their important role in bringing this lawsuit and representing the class of NorthShore healthcare workers. [4] …while those who complied with the mandate to keep their jobs despite having religious objections will be eligible for $3,000. [2]

NorthShore will pay $10,337,500 to compensate these health care employees who were victims of religious discrimination, and who were punished for their religious beliefs against taking an injection associated with aborted fetal cells. [3]

Other Agreements

As part of the settlement agreement, NorthShore will also change its unlawful “no religious accommodations” policy to make it consistent with the law, and to provide religious accommodations in every position across its numerous facilities. No position in any NorthShore facility will be considered off limits to unvaccinated employees with approved religious exemptions. [3]

In addition, employees who were terminated because of their religious refusal of the COVID shots will be eligible for rehire if they apply within 90 days of final settlement approval by the court, and they will retain their previous seniority level. [3]

Aftermath

Plaintiff Reaction

Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver said

“But as we went more into discovery, it was pretty clear they didn’t have a basis and they would lose big time,” [1]
in addition to financial payouts, NorthShore will also have to change its policy. [1]
“There will no longer be a no religious accommodation policy. Every position will be accommodated,” he said. “All the people can come back with no loss of seniority or job status.” [1]
Staver said he believes the case will have a broad impact. [1]
“It’s a big wakeup call to employers across the country that did not do these accommodations as they’re required under Title VII,” he said. [1]
“And I think it’s an encouragement for the employees that were abused and lost their jobs or threatened to lose their jobs, and some of them retirement, that they can pursue justice.” [1]

Liberty Counsel Vice President of Legal Affairs and Chief Litigation Counsel Horatio G. Mihet said,

“We are very pleased with the historic, $10 million settlement achieved in our class action lawsuit against NorthShore University HealthSystem. The drastic policy change and substantial monetary relief required by the settlement will bring a strong measure of justice to NorthShore’s employees who were callously forced to choose between their conscience and their jobs. [3]