Blog
Blog » THE CASE OF WAIT UNTIL ITS LATE LTD. V. FRANK FINK
THE CASE OF WAIT UNTIL ITS LATE LTD. V. FRANK FINK
27 March 2017
Learn from others' mistake by reading the summary of a very fresh decision of the Supreme Court about an ordinary dismissal.
Story
Wait Until Its Late Ltd. terminated the employment of its financial planning and analytical leader, Frank Fink. The reason of the termination was the loss of trust: Wait Until Its Late Ltd. conducted an examination and found out that Frank Fink unauthorizedly ordered overtime work and approved certain payments to his supervisor. Because of these infringements, Wait Until Its Late Ltd. lost his trust in Frank.
Although the examination was closed in May, Wait Until Its Late Ltd. could only fire Frank in October since his position was very important and Wait Until Its Late Ltd. had to find the new colleague for the job.
Court procedure
Frank Fink sued Wait Until Its Late Ltd. claiming that the justification of the termination is not valid and cannot be the reason of the termination. On the one hand, he disputed that he committed the said infringements. On the other hand, he claimed that the alleged loss of the trust happened in May while Wait Until Its Late Ltd. only fired him ca. 5 months later which cannot be a timely justification.
The first & second instance court dismissed Frank’s claim and accepted Wait Until Its Late Ltd’s argumentation that although he lost the trust in Frank earlier, he needed to find the new colleague for the position and only after this he could fire Frank.
By contrast, the Supreme Court found the termination wrongful. The loss of trust happened in May when the examination was closed. The fact that Wait Until Its Late Ltd. continued to employ Frank for 5 months after the examination, undermines his argumentation that the reason of termination is the loss of trust. In case of loss of trust, the employer cannot wait for months with the termination. The important role of the employee and the fact that the position needed to be filled cannot be an excuse for the delay of Wait Until Its Late Ltd.
Lesson learnt
If you find a valid reason to fire your employee, do not delay with the termination. The reason which is a valid one at the time it occurs, cannot necessarily be applied at a later date.
-
Hungary: Steps Towards Differentiating Between Domestic and International Procedural Public Policy
Drawing a well-defined line of demarcation between domestic and international public policy when enforcing foreign arbitral awards sends a clear pro-arbitration message from national courts in any jurisdiction. Does Hungarian case law come close to this level of sophistication? This post analyses this question in the context of procedural public policy, and it does so based on two recent appellate court decisions rendered in the context of enforcement of arbitral awards in accordance with the New York Convention.
Read more » -
EU ISSUED NEW GDPR STANDARD CONTRACTUAL CLAUSES – WHEN AND HOW TO USE THEM?
During summer 2021, the European Commission published two new "standard contractual clauses" on data protection regulation, which can be applied on the one hand, to the legal relationship between data controllers and data processors covered by the GDPR , and to the transfers of personal data to third countries, on the other. In this article, we answer the questions: what these SCCs regulate, how do they differ from the previous SCCs and how can your company use the new SCCs?
Read more » -
CAN THE NON-COMPETITION AGREEMENT BE VALID WITHOUT A PRECISE COMPENSATION IN HUNGARY?
The non-compete agreement may provide protection of the legitimate economic interests of the employer even after the termination of employment relationship. However, the Hungarian Labour Code lays down strict requirements for the agreement. In our article we analyse a recent decision of the Supreme Court about the importance of the precise determination of the compensation, so you as an employer can conclude a valid non-compete agreement.
Read more »