The appeal for unification of doctrine filed by the company is dismissed.
Posted: Mon Dec 23, 2024 4:35 am
It is permitted to cease work during the processing of the process that may declare the termination of the contract, but placing the burden of risk on the worker. He must assume the consequences of his actions in the event of a dismissal resolution, if the judge does not consider that there is just cause to declare the termination.
Supreme Court ruling
Case history
The case concerns a worker who has been suffering from continuous delays in the payment of his salary since July 2009. A conciliation request was filed and the worker immediately stated that if he had not received the wages due within a period of 8 days, he would not attend work. The company warned that if he behaved in this way it would be considered voluntary resignation.
The worker does not go to work and the company terminates his employment. Dismissal claim.
The court's judgment upholds the claim. It declares the contract terminated and orders the company to pay the corresponding compensation.
The company appeals, citing the case law doctrine that indicates that the taiwan email list employment relationship must be in force for the termination action to succeed, except in exceptional cases where it seriously undermines the dignity of the worker or affects his fundamental rights, which is not the case here.
Court ruling
The Supreme Court, making a flexible interpretation of traditional jurisprudence, reasons in its fourth legal basis:
there is a need to introduce greater flexibility in these cases so that the worker is not forced to maintain working conditions that , although not contrary to his dignity or integrity, may entail serious financial damage or a loss of professional options ."
The Court understands that the worker must be given the option in these cases to choose between exercising the resolutory action and continuing to provide services, in which case he will be within the framework of the judicial resolution, or to stop providing services at the same time as the action is exercised, assuming in this case the risk of the outcome of the process.
This innovative ruling has given rise to numerous rulings following this more flexible criterion and allowing for the abandonment of employment due to non-payment of wages.
Some issues to consider
This new line of case law does not clarify what happens to the employment contract from the moment the worker decides to stop attending his or her workplace until a court ruling is issued.
One option is to understand that the contract is suspended while the process is being processed. This would justify the constitutive nature of the sentence, but this does not fit with the risk assumed by the worker in the event that his termination action does not prosper. This cause of suspension would only occur if the company's breach is judicially deemed.
Supreme Court ruling
Case history
The case concerns a worker who has been suffering from continuous delays in the payment of his salary since July 2009. A conciliation request was filed and the worker immediately stated that if he had not received the wages due within a period of 8 days, he would not attend work. The company warned that if he behaved in this way it would be considered voluntary resignation.
The worker does not go to work and the company terminates his employment. Dismissal claim.
The court's judgment upholds the claim. It declares the contract terminated and orders the company to pay the corresponding compensation.
The company appeals, citing the case law doctrine that indicates that the taiwan email list employment relationship must be in force for the termination action to succeed, except in exceptional cases where it seriously undermines the dignity of the worker or affects his fundamental rights, which is not the case here.
Court ruling
The Supreme Court, making a flexible interpretation of traditional jurisprudence, reasons in its fourth legal basis:
there is a need to introduce greater flexibility in these cases so that the worker is not forced to maintain working conditions that , although not contrary to his dignity or integrity, may entail serious financial damage or a loss of professional options ."
The Court understands that the worker must be given the option in these cases to choose between exercising the resolutory action and continuing to provide services, in which case he will be within the framework of the judicial resolution, or to stop providing services at the same time as the action is exercised, assuming in this case the risk of the outcome of the process.
This innovative ruling has given rise to numerous rulings following this more flexible criterion and allowing for the abandonment of employment due to non-payment of wages.
Some issues to consider
This new line of case law does not clarify what happens to the employment contract from the moment the worker decides to stop attending his or her workplace until a court ruling is issued.
One option is to understand that the contract is suspended while the process is being processed. This would justify the constitutive nature of the sentence, but this does not fit with the risk assumed by the worker in the event that his termination action does not prosper. This cause of suspension would only occur if the company's breach is judicially deemed.