The "worst"case scenario:
summary dismissal⚖️

Once again, it has been demonstrated that employment law is never dull. On 29 July 2025, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal ruled in a case in which an employee, after almost 37 years of service, took a bag of liver sausages with him at the end of his shift. The meat producer dismissed the employee with immediate effect. The Court ruled that the summary dismissal was not legally valid. This ruling shows once again that summary dismissal can still lead to considerable disputes.

What happened:

At this meat producer, it was not unusual to place a “staff crate” with sausages at the exit so that colleagues could take them home. The sausages in question were no longer saleable for various reasons. The employee in question had taken a bag to put some sausages in and taken them home. The receptionist saw the bag and – although this is not clear from the ruling – (probably) reported it. According to the employer, this was theft, but according to the employee, it was simply part of a long-standing practice: unsaleable sausages could be taken home by employees.

Judgment of the Court:

The summary dismissal was not upheld. Although the employer had included in its Internal Regulations that it was not permitted to take products, goods or property without paying for them, the Court ruled that this was contrary to the “crate custom” in that department. There was therefore no clear and comprehensible policy. In addition, the employer did not sufficiently take into account the personal circumstances of the employee in its decision to dismiss him with immediate effect. A 59-year-old employee with almost 37 years of service at a sausage manufacturer who is dismissed with immediate effect does not, in the words of the Court, have a “particularly rosy” position on the labour market.
  
The employee not only received his transition payment, but also fixed compensation and fair compensation of € 150,000 gross. People say, “you pay for what you get”, but in this case, the sausage also proved to be an expensive affair.

Advice to entrepreneurs:

• Ensure clear and consistent policies. A rule in the internal regulations is not worth the paper it is written on if daily practice shows something completely different.
• Be alert to habits that undermine policy – Informal practices can be tolerated for years, but make it difficult to take sudden action.
• Take personal circumstances into account. Years of loyal service carry considerable weight in the assessment of summary dismissal.
• Document and communicate. Ensure that employees know in black and white what is and is not allowed, and repeat this regularly.
• Act carefully when dismissing someone with immediate effect. One wrong step can lead to high compensation payments and damage to your reputation.

Do you have any questions about dismissal with immediate effect or about drawing up clear policy? Please contact Dennis Oud, Tim van Riel, Tessa Sipkema or Elke Hofman-Bijvank.

You can read the ruling here.