Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Neth.4 THE NETHERLANDS

Neth.4 THE NETHERLANDS Termination of employment - agreement of parties that contract would terminate automatically on certain conditions - validity HEADNOTES Facts During 32 years the respondent, Van Koppen, was employed by the appel- lant, Van Zijl, in horticultural work. His wage was f 2200 net per month. On 5 January 1994, the Cantonal Court, at the request of the employer, dissolved the contract of employment between the parties as of 1 April 1994, in view of the employer's intention to close the undertaking. However, the undertaking did not in fact close at that date, and van Koppen continued to work beyond it. In September 1994 the employer sold the undertaking and terminated his activities. There was accordingly no more work for van Koppen. The employer petitioned the Cantonal Court to dissolve the contract of employment with van Koppen. However, after the Court indicated that, in case of dissolution, it would grant the worker an amount of f 85,000, the petition was withdrawn. In December 1994 the worker, in his turn petitioned the Cantonal Court to dissolve the contract of employment, for the same reasons: the undertaking had been sold, its activities had been terminated and there was no work to http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Labour Law Reports Online Brill

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/neth-4-the-netherlands-HaXxK2W7Na

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
eISSN
2211-6028
DOI
10.1163/221160296X00399
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Termination of employment - agreement of parties that contract would terminate automatically on certain conditions - validity HEADNOTES Facts During 32 years the respondent, Van Koppen, was employed by the appel- lant, Van Zijl, in horticultural work. His wage was f 2200 net per month. On 5 January 1994, the Cantonal Court, at the request of the employer, dissolved the contract of employment between the parties as of 1 April 1994, in view of the employer's intention to close the undertaking. However, the undertaking did not in fact close at that date, and van Koppen continued to work beyond it. In September 1994 the employer sold the undertaking and terminated his activities. There was accordingly no more work for van Koppen. The employer petitioned the Cantonal Court to dissolve the contract of employment with van Koppen. However, after the Court indicated that, in case of dissolution, it would grant the worker an amount of f 85,000, the petition was withdrawn. In December 1994 the worker, in his turn petitioned the Cantonal Court to dissolve the contract of employment, for the same reasons: the undertaking had been sold, its activities had been terminated and there was no work to

Journal

International Labour Law Reports OnlineBrill

Published: Jan 1, 1995

There are no references for this article.