The non-appearance of the company at the trial does not necessarily force the judicial body to classify as inadmissible the termination of the employment contract due to cessation of activity, dissolution and business liquidation.
Supreme Court ruling with appeal number 2154/2022.
The question raised by this appeal for the unification of doctrine is whether the failure of the company to appear at the trial necessarily leads to having to classify as inadmissible the termination of the employment contract due to cessation of activity, dissolution and business liquidation.
We are faced with a worker who provided services for a nursery school since August 2008 with the category of educator I.
It was affected by a temporary employment regulation file from March 2, 2020 to June 30, 2020
The company notified her of the termination of her employment contract due to cessation of activity, dissolution and liquidation of the company based on the provisions of article 51.1 of the Workers' Statute, with effect from June 30, 2020. The company did not pay the amount of €8,660.91 corresponding to the objective dismissal and the part of the vacation accrued by the worker.
The worker filed a lawsuit requesting the annulment of the termination of her employment contract and, subsidiarily, the inadmissibility. Likewise, an action was filed to claim amounts for vacations accrued but not taken.
The lower court ruling partially upheld the worker's claim, upholding the claim for the amount requested in the worker's claim, and rejecting the inadmissibility of the dismissal, declaring it admissible.
As a consequence of this resolution, the worker filed an appeal, alleging violation of article 53 of the Workers' Statute, in relation to articles 105 and 122.3 and article 6.4 of the Civil Code, requesting that the dismissal be inadmissible due to lack of accreditation of the causes of dismissal due to the company's failure to appear at the trial. The TSJ of Madrid declared the admissibility of the dismissal, confirming the lower court ruling.
Dissatisfied again with the ruling, the worker filed an appeal for the unification of doctrine against the ruling of the TSJ of Madrid, requesting the cassation and annulment of the appealed ruling, demanding a ruling that upheld the claim in its entirety.
Failed: Our high court dismisses the appeal for unification of doctrine filed by the worker's legal representation.
