The proposed changes to the Swedish legislation are necessary to implement an EU directive on the protection of trade secrets. The Proposal further suggests, independently of the EU directive, a provision on criminal liability for individuals who attack a trade secret to which they have lawful access due to employment or other similar grounds.
The Swedish Labour Court found that an accountant had to pay compensation to a former employer due to a breach of a non-competition clause in his contract of employment. The clause was not deemed unreasonable considering the accountant’s transfer of his business to the employer at the time of employment as well as the limited interruption the clause had on the accountant’s future ability to earn income.
The Swedish Labour Court found that an employer was not obligated to adjust the work duties of a firefighter with health issues nor give him a transfer within the workplace. The employer’s requirement for all firefighters to perform certain work duties was not unreasonable, thus giving the employer the right to terminate the employment contract.
A CEO of a company received an annual bonus based on the company’s financial result on top of his monthly salary. Even though the vacation pay was not specified when the bonuses were paid out, it was deemed to be included and the CEO had therefore received the vacation pay he was entitled to.
L&E Global’s 2017 Global Handbook | Employees vs Independent Contractors
An exit agreement with an employee had previously been declared invalid. The Swedish Labour Court found that the employee was entitled to salary during the period between when she had left the employment, until the time when the exit agreement was declared invalid.
The Swedish Labour Court found that two employees and their new employer had intentionally violated the Copyright Act and the Act on the Protection of Trade Secrets. They were jointly liable to pay damages amounting to SEK 4,000,000 to the former employer for transferring databases that constituted trade secrets and copyrighted material to the new employer.
A loud argument about a salary decrease led to an employee leaving the workplace for good. The employer was found to have taken advantage of the uncertain situation regarding the employee’s employment, in a way that was equivalent to a summary dismissal and was liable to pay damages to the employee.
The case concerned whether the termination of an employee’s employment contract was due to redundancy or whether it was related to the employee’s application for parental leave. The Court found that the dismissal of the employee had a close connection in time with the employee’s filing for parental leave and that the dismissal was in breach of the non-discrimination principle of the Swedish Parental Leave Act.
The case concerned an employee who was dismissed due to his inability to perform in accordance with his undertakings following from the employment contract. The Court concluded that the dismissal was based on legal grounds.