A peculiar and unusual case was recently resolved in a German court, where a judge ruled in favor of a man’s right to urinate while standing. The case began when a landlord sued his tenant for a substantial amount of $2,200 (1,900 euros) in damages, claiming that the tenant’s habit of urinating while standing had caused damage to the bathroom floor.

The case went through the legal system, and after careful deliberation, Judge Stefan Hank delivered a final ruling in favor of the tenant. In his judgment, Judge Hank noted that the man’s practice of urinating while standing is culturally accepted, stating that “urinating in this manner remains a common practice in many countries, if not all around the world.” Although he agreed with an expert’s report that uric acid in the tenant’s urine had caused some damage to the bathroom floor, Judge Hank concluded, “Men who insist on standing should anticipate occasional disputes with housemates, especially women, but they cannot be held responsible for incidental damages.” He added, “Despite increasing efforts to discourage standing urination, it remains a prevalent behavior.”

Despite the definitive court ruling, the German society is still embroiled in a debate about whether men should sit or stand while urinating. Some toilets are equipped with red signs similar to traffic signals to prevent standing urination. However, those who choose to sit are often referred to pejoratively as “Sitzpinkler,” a term suggesting that sitting while urinating is not considered a masculine behavior.