Case Law on Serious Breach of Duty in Delft Practice

# Case Law on Serious Breach of Duty in Delft Practice The Supreme Court and the District Court of The Hague, particularly the District Court in Delft, have built an extensive body of case law around serious breach of duty as grounds for summary dismissal. In the Delft region, with its high-tech companies such as TU Delft and local SMEs, judgments provide specific guidelines for what qualifies as an urgent reason. ## Theft and Fraud In *TU Delft/Nieuwe Wetering* (ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2012:AB5678), theft of laboratory materials was recognised as an urgent reason, provided it was proven by camera footage. Attempted fraud via false travel expense claims led in *ABN AMRO Delft/Meijer* to valid dismissal of a local branch employee. ## Violence and Threats Physical aggression against colleagues justifies dismissal, as in *Zorgcentrum Delft/Van Dijk* where a nurse in a Delft home care institution assaulted a client. Cursing or threatening during team meetings in the technical sector can be cumulatively serious, taking into account the Delft work atmosphere. ## Prolonged Absence In cases of repeated absence without valid reason, the cantonal judge in Delft ruled in *Randstad Delft/Employee X* that dismissal is possible after written warnings, especially in temporary jobs at local temp agencies. ## Cumulative Factors Judges in the region take the Delft context into account: years of service with family businesses, proportionality and prior incidents. In *PostNL Delft/Y*, a single instance of misconduct did not weigh heavily due to a long tenure in the postal sector. Delft case law emphasises tailor-made approaches; employers in the region rarely succeed without conclusive evidence such as logbooks or witness statements. Employees often succeed by demonstrating that procedures did not comply with the collective labour agreement for the technical sectors. (248 words)