A new sentence declares void a dismissal caused by the Covid crisis

A Barcelona court rejects that the dismissal is only inadmissible and condemns a company to reinstate the employee.

The trickle of contradictory judgments continues interpreting the meaning of the prohibition to fire contained in article 2 of Decree-Law 9/2020. The 29th Social Court of Barcelona has sentenced a company to reinstate one of its sales representatives who was dismissed during the months of the state of alarm. According to the ruling, the dismissal is null for contravening said provision, and the company must have opted for an ERTE of suspension or reduction due to force majeure.

In the case prosecuted, the company notified the worker of its termination at the beginning of May, in full force of the state of alarm. As alleged in the dismissal letter, there had been a drop in sales and the forecast, explained the text, was that the figures in the coming years would remain lower than usual. In the same letter, the employer admitted the inadmissibility and offered him a compensation of 33 days per year worked.

The affected party contested the dismissal and claimed its nullity for having occurred during the confinement, contravening the special regulations approved in labor matters. Some arguments that the judge admits, that he reproaches the company for not having applied the measures contained in the decree-laws approved during the state of alarm and having opted for the option of «terminating the employment contract, which was prohibited by that regulation exceptional imperative ”.

A new sentence declares void a dismissal caused by the Covid crisis | Legal | Five days

According to the ruling, the business decision contravened article 2 of Decree-Law 9/2020 “and therefore must be declared null and void, in accordance with the provisions of art. 6.3 of the Civil Code “, which establishes that” acts contrary to imperative and prohibitive norms are void. ” As a consequence of the declaration of nullity, the Court condemns the company to reinstate the plaintiff under the same conditions and to pay him the wages he had missed during the processing of the procedure.