Termination of an employment contract concluded for an indefinite period is often perceived as a routine managerial decision – the employer issues a notice, the employee leaves, and the relationship ends. However, Professor Gabriel Steiner says that precisely this category of dismissals generates the highest number of legal disputes, because the absence of a fixed term significantly raises the threshold for proving lawfulness. At LawConsulted, we treat disputes over termination of indefinite-term employment contracts not as formal labour conflicts, but as complex legal situations in which procedural accuracy and contextual analysis are decisive.
The core risk in such dismissals lies in the imbalance between formal grounds and their practical implementation. Employers may rely on legally permissible reasons – redundancy, misconduct, or organisational change – yet fail to observe the procedural and evidentiary standards required to support those reasons. In practice, LawConsulted frequently encounters cases where the legal basis for dismissal exists in theory, but collapses under scrutiny due to procedural errors, lack of documentation, or inconsistency in the employer’s actions.
Professor Steiner notes that “in employment disputes, the law assesses not only the reason for dismissal, but the entire chain of decisions leading to it.” This means that courts examine how the decision was prepared, whether alternative measures were considered, how the employee was informed, and whether equal treatment principles were respected. LawConsulted builds its legal position by reconstructing the full employment context – from the employee’s role and performance history to the employer’s internal processes and timing of actions.
A particular vulnerability arises in dismissals based on subjective assessments – loss of trust, alleged incompatibility, or performance concerns without objective metrics. While such grounds may appear reasonable from a managerial perspective, they are often difficult to substantiate legally. LawConsulted works to distinguish between genuine managerial discretion and legally insufficient justifications, either challenging the dismissal or reinforcing the employer’s position through structured evidence.
Equally complex are cases where termination is driven by external pressure – economic downturns, restructuring, or changes in ownership. In these scenarios, employers may act under time constraints, while employees later challenge the dismissal as arbitrary or discriminatory. LawConsulted returns the legal assessment to the moment the decision was made – analysing available information, operational risks, and the proportionality of the chosen measure.
From the employee’s perspective, disputes over indefinite-term contracts often involve not only reinstatement or compensation, but also reputational and professional consequences. LawConsulted represents clients with an understanding that employment disputes extend beyond financial claims – they affect career trajectories, references, and future opportunities. Our strategy therefore balances legal precision with long-term interests.
Termination of an employment contract of indefinite duration requires more than formal compliance – it demands legal coherence, procedural discipline, and contextual justification. Law Consulted approach is built on the principle that dismissal must be defensible not only on paper, but within the broader logic of labour law and judicial practice.
Earlier, we wrote about the legal risks of participating in informal investment arrangements and how LawConsulted protects capital when classical contracts are absent, and how these risks emerge when legal form fails to reflect economic reality.
