The High Court of Justice of Asturias upheld an earlier ruling by a labour court in Oviedo. The driver was awarded €9,315.82 in compensation for the termination of his employment contract, together with a further €7,501 for the breach of his fundamental rights. The total award exceeded €16,800.
The ruling illustrates that an employee’s departure may not be treated as an ordinary resignation where serious breaches by an employer make continued employment untenable.
Dispute began over pay
The driver had worked for the company since March 2021. Tensions increased in early 2024, when he began signing his payslips with a note stating that he disagreed with the amounts shown.
He claimed the company had failed to pay him correctly, including a seniority supplement and pay rises provided for under the collective agreement covering road transport in Asturias.
The dispute subsequently widened. The driver sought almost €29,000 for claims including overtime, waiting time, night work and daily allowances. He also challenged two disciplinary sanctions imposed in October 2024: a two-day suspension from work and pay, followed by a further 15-day suspension.
Workplace accident added to dispute
The court also considered an earlier disagreement concerning a workplace accident.
The company initially refused to recognise the incident as work-related, prompting the driver to begin proceedings to have it reclassified. Spain’s National Social Security Institute ultimately confirmed that it was a workplace accident.
The court found that the disagreement had further damaged the employment relationship.
Threats at company premises
A central incident took place in December 2024, when the owner’s son, who also worked for the company, became involved in an argument with the driver at the company’s premises.
He was later convicted of making threats. A criminal court found that he had told the driver during the confrontation that he would “smash his head in”. The threat was captured in an audio recording submitted during the proceedings.
According to the court’s findings, he also told the driver that the company had had enough of him. The court concluded that the threat could reasonably have caused the driver to fear for his safety, even though no physical violence followed.
Resignation withdrawn within 24 hours
A few days after the incident, the driver informed the company that he was resigning. Less than 24 hours later, however, he sent a further letter withdrawing his resignation.
On 20 December, he contacted the employer again, this time stating that he was ending his employment contract because of violations he said he had experienced over several months.
He referred to degrading treatment, insults, unpaid wages and threats. He also reported that he had attended hospital with heart palpitations following the confrontation.
The employer later argued that the driver had simply abandoned his job and was therefore not entitled to compensation for the termination of his contract.
Both the first-instance court and the High Court of Justice of Asturias rejected that argument.
Court finds continued employment was untenable
The judges noted that, under Spanish Supreme Court case law, an employee may stop working before a judgment is delivered where they believe an employer has committed particularly serious breaches.
Such a decision carries a risk. A claim may be dismissed if a court subsequently finds that there were insufficient grounds for the employee to leave.
In this case, however, the court found that the required threshold had been met. The accumulation of disputes meant that continued employment had become untenable.
The court considered the pay dispute, the disagreement over the workplace accident, the disciplinary sanctions, the claims for outstanding payments, the threats and the deterioration in the driver’s mental health.
Following the December incident, the employee required medical treatment for tachycardia. Medical records referred to severe work-related stress, anxiety and distress.
The court found that it was not reasonable to expect him to continue working in those conditions, which also included a lack of adequate rest areas.
Further compensation for breach of fundamental rights
The court also upheld the additional award of €7,501 for the breach of the employee’s fundamental rights.
A significant factor was that the threats had been made by the owner’s son, who was also employed by the company. The court found no evidence that the employer had taken steps to address his conduct or protect the driver.
That failure was treated as a breach of the company’s duty to provide a safe workplace in which the employee’s dignity and fundamental rights were respected. The judgment also referred to the wider risks faced by workers in a sector exposed to threats including cargo crime in Europe.
The High Court of Justice of Asturias dismissed the company’s appeal in full, confirming both the compensation for the termination of the employment contract and the additional award for the harm suffered.
