1.6.2016
Haviltex on criminal terminology in a dismissal letter? Labor Law 2016, 26
'Through this letter we confirm to you, the instant dismissal given by us to you on Tuesday afternoon, January 6 last. The reason is briefly as follows: the theft of company property.' What should have been a short summary resulted in a long legal battle. Only six years later was it finally settled. In the Feb. 19, 2016 ruling, the Supreme Court considered that under different circumstances, different meanings can be assigned to such terms.
The use of criminal terms in a termination letter is at the center of the Supreme Court's judgment of Feb. 19, 2016 (hereinafter, the "Autocentrum Zuid Nederland judgment). Should these terms be interpreted in a criminal law manner, or can they also be given a different meaning? The case concerns an employee who was summarily dismissed because he had twice used his employer's fuel card for his wife's car. After these refueling incidents were raised in two conversations with the employee, the employer accused the employee of theft and summary dismissal followed. The accusation and immediate dismissal were subsequently confirmed in writing to the employee with the above quote.
Continue reading?
Download the entire article as a PDF