Another round in the protracted dispute over a dismissal in Bagnes VS
Published: Wednesday, Dec 11th 2024, 08:50
العودة إلى البث المباشر
The Federal Supreme Court has upheld an appeal by the former mayor and former municipal clerk of Bagnes VS. The cantonal court must re-examine the allegations of forgery of documents and falsification of documents in office.
In October 2023, the Valais cantonal court sentenced the former president to a conditional fine of 50 daily rates of CHF 95 and the former clerk to a conditional fine of 30 daily rates of CHF 230.
In a decision published on Wednesday, the Federal Supreme Court overturned the verdicts and referred the case back to the lower court for reassessment. The defendants argued that they had made a so-called error of fact.
They had assumed that the employment relationship with an employee terminated in this case was a contract under private law and not a contract under public law. If this were the case, the facts of the case would have to be assessed under criminal law in the same way as the defendants had assumed.
The entire matter has not been considered from this perspective in the proceedings to date, the Federal Supreme Court states. It also states that the termination of a contract under private law does not constitute a document. There are also no formal requirements for the termination of such an employment relationship.
Established in court
In fact, all sides assumed for years that the contract was a private law contract until the public law division of the cantonal court ruled in February 2021 that this was not the case. However, the question also arises as to whether the error of fact could have been avoided if, for example, the parties concerned had acted with the due diligence incumbent upon them.
The background to the case is the dismissal of an employee of the municipality of Bagnes (now Val de Bagnes), who is considered a whistleblower in connection with the illegal chalet affair in Verbier VS. The man was dismissed in February 2016, but the decision had already been taken in November 2015.
By waiting, the defendants had wanted to prevent a connection being made between the dismissal and a letter from the dismissed employee. The latter had announced that he would report several cases of building law violations. (Judgement 6B_1315/2023 of 26.11.2024)
©كيستون/إسدا
Arabic 
English 
German 
French 
Spanish