An associate in a small law firm arranged an interview with the police regarding a matter she had for a client. She scheduled the meeting without informing anyone, even though she had been told not to handle the matter.
On the day of the meeting, she didn’t show up. When the meeting participant called her, she informed them that she was no longer employed and did not share the contact information for the responsible lawyer. The next day, she was called to a discussion meeting set for five days later. When she failed to appear, the responsible lawyer sent a written summary dismissal the same day.
The Norwegian District Court agreed that the dismissal was justified. Her actions were a gross breach of her duty of loyalty. Additionally, the episode had materially damaged the company’s reputation. The Court also noted that previous issues – such as ignoring instructions, failing to report on her work, and not submitting timesheets – made further cooperation impossible.
iuno’s opinion
A summary dismissal is a serious reaction and requires specific grounds. This case shows that disloyal behaviour can justify a summary dismissal when it harms the company’s reputation. We have previously written about a summary dismissal due to sexual harassment here.
iuno recommends that companies only consider a summary dismissal when there is a clear and acute need for immediate action. It is important to document instructions, warnings, and follow-ups carefully to show that the employee was given a fair chance to correct their behavior. The burden of proof is higher in summary dismissal cases than in termination cases because of the more severe consequences for the employee.
[The Follo and Nordre Østfold District Court’s judgement of 24 September 2025 in case TFNO-2024-175332]