En virksomhed kunne ikke opnå forbud mod en tidligere medarbejders konsulentarbejde for en konkurrent. Byretten havde fundet, at virksomheden havde fortabt muligheden for at håndhæve konkurrenceklausulen, og landsretten afviste kæremålet, fordi klausulperioden var udløbet.
En kundeklausul indgået i en ejeraftale kunne ikke opretholdes, fordi kapitalejeren reelt skulle betragtes som funktionær.
En kundeklausul efter funktionærloven kunne opretholdes i en ny ansættelseskontrakt, selvom ansættelsesklausulloven var trådt i kraft. Bordet fangede dog, da medarbejderen i forbindelse med opsigelsen modtog og skrev under på en klausul på andre vilkår.
En konkurrenceklausul indgået i en ejeraftale kunne opretholdes fuldt ud, selvom kapitalejeren havde afhændet sine kapitalandele, var fortsat som medarbejder og siden blev opsagt.
It was discrimination on the grounds of religion when a day care centre required a childcare assistant who was a Jehovah’s Witness to wear a costume for the centre’s Shrovetide party.
A social and healthcare worker’s disclosure of confidential information to the daughter of a citizen did not justify summary dismissal.
The employer was not liable for an industrial accident where a defective desk collapsed and dragged an employee down with it.
The publication provides insight into some of the most interesting international trends seen in relation to employment law and the workforce of the future and, thus, harnesses the great knowledge and expertise of Ius Laboris lawyers in 56 member countries.
The first Tuesday of October marked the start of the new parliamentary year and, in the usual way, the Government introduced its legislative programme for the parliamentary year 2024/2025.
The ECJ recently found that a provision in a German collective agreement on overtime pay potentially violated the prohibition of discrimination against part-time employees as well as the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of gender.
The summary dismissal of an employee who had sharply criticised her employer and several identifiable colleagues in a closed staff group on Facebook was justified.
A municipality was justified in dismissing an employee due to the long-term prospects of her returning to work after sickness absence.
A security company had not forfeited the right to summarily dismiss an employee, even though the company did not summarily dismiss the employee until more than 3 weeks after the company became aware that the employee had set up and operated a competing business.
According to the assessment of the Data Protection Agency, there were no grounds for the Agency to initiate a case against a municipality based on the establishment of a reference register.