Rotterdam District Court, 13 January 2025, ECLI:NL:RBROT:2025:450
This case centres on whether the employer validly summarily dismissed the employee for theft.
Facts
After 37 years of employment, the employee was summarily dismissed for theft. Without the employer’s permission, the employee had put 17 pastries and 36 rulers in a bag, with a purchase value of around EUR 37. The employer had a policy allowing staff to take home products past their sell-by date. The employee stated he took the pastries believing they had passed their expiry date. Regarding the rulers, the employee stated he intended to pay for them later. The employee also stated he had taken the products to hand out to children at the stables where he volunteered. The employer summarily dismissed the employee for theft.
Ruling
The subdistrict court ruled that the employee’s summary dismissal was not validly given. Although the court established that the employee had committed theft, the mitigating circumstances and personal consequences for the employee outweighed the summary dismissal imposed by the employer.
The subdistrict court considered the summary dismissal too drastic a measure, taking into account the employee’s long employment of more than 37 years, the relatively low value of the stolen goods, the plausibility that this was the first time the employee had committed theft, and the far-reaching consequences the dismissal had for the employee. The court annulled the summary dismissal. Nevertheless, the court ruled that a reasonable ground for dissolving the employment contract did exist. Although the court did not find seriously culpable conduct, it ruled that the employer’s trust in the employee had been damaged to such an extent that continuing the employment contract was not considered reasonable. The employment contract was dissolved with the award of a transition payment.
Conclusion
This ruling underlines that summary dismissal is a measure of last resort and is only justified in exceptional cases. At the same time, this ruling emphasises that theft constitutes a reasonable ground for dissolving an employment contract, even where there is no seriously culpable conduct.
Do you have questions about summary dismissal or dissolving an employment contract? Please feel free to contact one of our employment lawyers.
Click here for the full ruling (in Dutch).
