Supreme Court: Employee's sickness does not constitute force majeure
The Supreme Court has held that an employee's sickness cannot be considered force majeure. Such a decision was made in a case in which the plaintiff sought an award of salary and a number of other work-related benefits. The regional court dismissed the claim, indicating that the defendant had successfully raised the statute of limitations. The plaintiff appealed against the decision, but the appellate court dismissed the appeal after agreeing with the assessment of the court of first instance. In her appeal, the plaintiff alleged a violation of the statute of limitations. She argued that the statute of limitations period had been suspended while she was on sick leave for several months.
The Supreme Court disagreed with the plaintiff. In its reasons for the decision, the Court pointed out that sickness does not constitute force majeure and does not suspend the statute of limitations period. The Court upheld the previous line of jurisprudence according to which events that constitute force majeure are external to the person concerned, extraordinary, unavoidable and unforeseeable, with such an impact against which effects there is no defence. Among other examples of situations which do not, in principle, constitute force majeure, the Court mentioned being abroad and being in custody.