House for Whistleblowers Act into force on July 1, 2016 ›

On July 1, 2016 the House for Whistleblowers Act will enter into force. With this Act legislation is adopted to protect whistleblowers as well as to provide more opportunities to investigate a possible social abuse. By regulating the manner in which social abuse must be notificated, unwarranted publicity may be averted as the suspicions of social abuse may be dealt with internally.


What needs to be done


Employers who have more than 50 employees are stipulated to adopt a specific Whistleblowers’ regulation. This regulation must be approved by the Works Council and needs to set out a number of mandatory elements such as:


-        What is to be considered a social abuse;

-        How can the notification be done;

-        How will the company deal with the notification; and

-        That the notification will be dealt with confidentially.


We advice you to adopt a regulation in a timely manner. A model regulation has been publicised already but if you need more information or want a bespoke regulation, please do not hesitate to contact Mr Wouter de Bruijn

Conditional request for termination of employment contract still possible after immediate dismissal ›

The Supreme Court of the Netherlands has ruled on 23 December 2016 (HR:2016:2998) that an employer who has given an employee an immediate dismissal (‘ ontslag op staande voet’), can if necessary in addition thereto still conditionally request the district court to have the employment contract terminated. The condition is that the request can be deemed made in the event that the district court judges that the given immediate dismissal is not legally valid. After the introduction of the Work and Social Security Act on 1 July 2015, it was no longer clear whether a conditional request for termination of an employment contract was still possible. 


A conditional termination of an employment contract protects the employer against the possibility that after months or years of proceedings it would be established that the immediate dismissal was not legally valid. In such an event the employer could be confronted with a major salary or damages claim by the employee. 


The Supreme Court further ruled that the proceedings concerning the validity of the immediate dismissal and the conditional termination request proceedings should as much as possible be dealt with simultaneously and coherently. Meaning that when an employee initiates proceedings at the district court to have the validity of an immediate dismissal judged, it is still advisable for the employer to simultaneously file a conditional termination request; in the event that the district court would judge that a given immediate dismissal is not valid, it could still judge in favour of the employer that the employment contract can and must be terminated on the basis of a valid reason by court’s order. 



For more information regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact Alper Tekinerdogan

- ›