An Austrian man was recently found guilty of gross negligent manslaughter after his girlfriend tragically froze to death during a mountain hike. The case has ignited an international discussion about personal responsibility in the challenging sport of mountaineering.
Thomas Plamberger, 37, received a suspended five-month prison sentence and a fine of 9,600 euros (approximately $11,300) from an Innsbruck courtroom. The conviction stems from the death of his 33-year-old girlfriend, Kerstin Gurtner, whose body was discovered in January 2025, just meters below the summit of Grossglockner, Austria’s highest mountain. The unfortunate event occurred the morning after the couple began their ascent.
During the trial, Mr. Plamberger testified that his girlfriend became severely exhausted near the summit. He claimed they jointly decided he would descend to seek help while she remained at their location.
Judge Norbert Hofer, who presided over the non-jury trial, expressed profound sympathy for Mr. Plamberger, acknowledging his immense personal loss. However, the judge also strongly condemned his actions during the fateful hike.
“Mr. Plamberger, you have borne an incredible burden — you lost a person,” Judge Hofer stated. “She placed herself in your care and trusted that her partner would bring her up safely. If you had acted differently, I strongly assume that your partner would have survived.”
Visibly apologetic, Mr. Plamberger expressed deep regret, saying, “I am infinitely sorry for what happened. I loved Kerstin — we always made decisions together on the mountain.”
The trial featured around 15 witnesses and experts, including members of Mr. Plamberger’s family, rescue personnel, law enforcement, and Ms. Gurtner’s mother, Gertraud Gurtner. Interestingly, Ms. Gurtner’s mother stated she did not believe Mr. Plamberger was responsible for her daughter’s death.
Drawing international attention, the proceedings served as a crucial test of an Austrian legal principle known as Garantenstellung. This concept mandates a “duty of care” to protect others and avert danger in various situations, such as parents safeguarding children or a driver after an accident. This verdict could significantly impact Austria’s vast alpine tourism sector by potentially increasing legal liabilities for individuals involved in risky excursions.
Prior to the trial, both Mr. Plamberger and the prosecutors publicly presented their differing accounts of the January 2025 climb. This unusually public disclosure for a case against a private individual set the stage for intense scrutiny.
Mr. Plamberger, a professional chef, asserted through his lawyer that the expedition took a dire turn when his girlfriend experienced sudden exhaustion. Conversely, authorities highlighted numerous alleged missteps on his part.
According to Mr. Plamberger, Ms. Gurtner showed signs of exhaustion around midnight during the hike. He initially contacted the police for a rescue helicopter but, according to police records, assured them that “everything was fine.” After this initial call, Ms. Gurtner was reportedly unable to continue. Mr. Plamberger then decided to descend alone for help. He made another call for a helicopter around 3:30 a.m., but Ms. Gurtner’s body was found later that morning.
Prosecutors identified nine critical errors they attributed to Mr. Plamberger, including his failure to carry adequate emergency equipment and not turning back when weather conditions deteriorated.
The legal arguments centered on Garantenstellung. The prosecution contended that Mr. Plamberger, being more experienced than Ms. Gurtner—whom he had been dating for approximately a year—had a direct responsibility for her safety. The defense, however, argued that both individuals were experienced and had planned the trip together.
During Thursday’s trial, Judge Hofer, himself an experienced mountain rescuer, admonished Mr. Plamberger for failing to clearly communicate his girlfriend’s critical condition to the police and for not taking immediate protective measures.
“‘My partner can’t continue’ was not communicated — that is the most fundamental information,” Judge Hofer emphasized. “Then the strategy changes — a position sheltered from wind, take out blankets — as a mountaineer you must know that.”
A pivotal moment occurred late in the trial when a surprise witness, Andrea Bergener, Mr. Plamberger’s ex-girlfriend, testified that he had previously abandoned her during a night hike on Grossglockner years earlier.
“Once we descended the Glockner at night, and suddenly he was gone,” she recounted. “I felt dizzy, I screamed, and I was completely alone. From then on, we didn’t go on any more hikes together.”
Ultimately, the judge concluded that Mr. Plamberger bore significant responsibility for Ms. Gurtner’s death. He highlighted the vast disparity in their mountaineering skills, stating they were “galaxies” apart, and faulted Mr. Plamberger for not adequately assessing and understanding her capabilities.
“You are an excellent alpinist, but someone who finds it very difficult to make the switch between your own limits and those of others,” the judge remarked.
Following the verdict, Mr. Plamberger’s lawyer, Kurt Jelinek, commented that the trial was “fair” and his client “accepted the verdict with composure.” He indicated that Mr. Plamberger would take time to consider whether to appeal the decision.
Fundamentally, the case raised questions about the extent of individual responsibility when engaging in high-risk activities with others. This issue has grown increasingly pertinent in Austria, where a surge in less-experienced visitors to the mountains has led to a rise in accidents in recent years.
Severin Glaser, a professor of criminal law at the University of Innsbruck, suggested that the guilty verdict could redefine mountaineering practices in Austria as individuals increasingly weigh their potential liability during personal excursions.
“This could shift the responsibility for yourself if you’re doing something dangerous,” he explained. “The costs of mountaineering, the costs of expressing your freedom might rise, and maybe some people are not willing anymore to pay this higher price.”