Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Summary dismissal - need for immediate action once grounds are known HEADNOTES Facts The respondent, Theelen, was in the service of the appellant, Brinkman GmbH, a company incorporated under German law. His functions were, on the one hand, to be present a few hours per week in a showroom of the employer in the Netherlands and, on the other, to act as sales representative for the employer, using his own car for that purpose. From 23 September to 31 October 1992 he was unable to work because of illness. On 9 October, he received a sum of f 20.000 from a customer in favour of the employer; according to him, he informed the employer of the receipt of this sum the next day by telephone. He did not, however, transfer the sum. On 27 October 1992 he was summarily dismissed. The employer informed him that he had been dismissed because (a) he was not authorised to receive the money; and (b) he had failed to pay the money to the employer. Theelen contested the dismissal in the Cantonal Court. He sought a declara- tory judgment that the dismissal was void as well as the award of wages for
International Labour Law Reports Online – Brill
Published: Jan 1, 1995
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.