An employee was surprisingly terminated after 15 years of employment, due to the deteriorating in her health situation and without the employer raising any argument regarding her professional performance. The Court held that although the employee was the one to file the claim, the burden of proof to show legitimate reasoning for termination is on the employer. The employer did not meet the burden of proof for a relevant motive to terminate and therefore the Court determined that the reason for dismissal was illegal due to her medical condition and temporary physical disability.
Published in Afik News 213 14.09.2016
Related articles
A petition against a tender filed with delay due to correspondence and an attempt to exhaust proceedings may be rejected
Public Law, Environment and Tenders
Dispute Resolution
A bidder received notice of non-winning of the tender and only after nearly two months in which it conducted correspondence with the municipality did it moved the Court seeking to cancel the tender. The Court rejected the petition due to delay and held that an attempt to exhaust the proceedings does not stop the race […]
One who purchases services in the name of a company knowing that the company cannot pay for such may be held personally liable for its debt
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
Dispute Resolution
The sole shareholder and director of a company ordered flight tickets in the name of the company despite knowing that the company was in financial distress and would be unable to pay its debts. The Court held that the shareholder was liable for the company debt. Generally, a company is a separate legal entity from […]
A bidder that does not meet the prerequisites will be disqualified and cannot be validated retroactively
Public Law, Environment and Tenders
Dispute Resolution
A bidder with a criminal record relating to a violation of labor laws was selected as the winner of a tender in contrary to the threshold requirement in the tender. The Court accepted the petition and canceled the bidder’s win due to non-compliance with the threshold conditions and a violation to the principle of equality. […]
Breach of duty of disclosure by a general partner in a limited partnership and taking excess funds justifies the partnership’s dissolution
Business, Corporate and Joint Ventures
Dispute Resolution
A general partner took from the partnership “success fees” that were hidden from the limited partners. The limited partners sought to dissolve the partnership on the grounds that although the partnership agreement stipulated that the partner would be entitled to success fees, the partner determined their own rate and hid it from the limited partners. […]