Introduction
Honesty is essential in the employment relationship, especially during illness. A recent appeal ruling shows that lying about private circumstances can have serious consequences. This blog discusses why the trial court declared a summary dismissal still legally valid after an employee was misled.
The situation: inaccessibility and implausible explanations
A sales associate who had been employed for just over a month called in sick and was subsequently unreachable by his employer. By e-mail, he reported having migraines and promised to return to work after the weekend. When he did not show up on the appointed day, he sent another e-mail reporting that his "best friend" had died. Again, he remained unreachable after that.
The employer tried to make contact, but to no avail. Finally, the employer decided to go to the employee's home address, but he was not found there either. The situation led to frustration and distrust on the part of the employer.
Instant dismissal and the first ruling
The employee was then summarily dismissed for unauthorized absence and failure to comply with sickness monitoring requirements. Moreover, the employer strongly doubted the truth of the stated reason for absence. To gain clarity, the employer asked the employee to provide an obituary card as proof. When this failed to materialize, the employer stood by the dismissal.
However, the subdistrict court initially ruled that the dismissal was too severe and overturned the instant dismissal. The judge found that, despite the employee's unprofessional behavior, the situation was not serious enough to warrant such a severe measure.
Appeal: justified dismissal after all
The employer did not leave it at that and appealed. During these proceedings, statements from the family of the allegedly deceased girlfriend revealed that the employee had not had a close relationship with her at all. Indeed, he had not even attended the funeral.
The court ruled that the employee had knowingly lied and that this lie had even continued during the proceedings at first instance. According to the court, this serious form of deception irreparably damaged the trust between employer and employee. The summary dismissal was still declared legally valid.
The employee was ordered to pay nearly €5,000 in litigation costs for both the first instance and appeal proceedings.
Importance for practice
This case highlights that employee honesty is essential, especially during a period of illness when trust between employer and employee is especially important. If an employee is guilty of serious lies, this may ultimately still result in a legally valid summary dismissal, even if a first judge rules otherwise.
Conclusion
When an employee knowingly tells falsehoods about illness or private circumstances, this can seriously damage trust. Even if a district judge initially rules otherwise, an appeal may still justify instant dismissal. Transparency and honesty are thus crucial in any employment relationship.
This blog was written by Mr. Stijn Blom, employment lawyer at Arbeidsadvocaat.nl B.V. Stijn has extensive experience in employment law and assists entrepreneurs daily with a wide range of employment-related matters. From dismissal cases to drafting watertight contracts and policies – with his practical and personal approach, he helps employers and employees move forward. Want to know more?Visit Stijn's page.
Arbeidsadvocaat.nl is happy to think with you if you have any questions about XXX. Please feel free to contact us .
April 2025
