H30･11･29 at Tokyo District Court

【Judgement】 lawful dismissal

【Company】 Credit Suisse

【Category 】 disciplinary and ordinary dismissal

【Reference】 Rodo Hanrei Journal 85-40

【Position/Salary】 Director / JPY 22M

【Summary】

（This case concerns the legal validity of a disciplinary dismissal and a regular dismissal that were executed on the grounds of certain actions, such as sending emails, by a worker who was reinstated to their position following a judgment of invalid dismissal but was subsequently reassigned from the front office to the back office.)

Considering that the work rules mention the right to reassign and the employment contract lacks any indication of a job-specific agreement, the employment contract cannot be recognized as a job-specific agreement.

The fact that the plaintiff accessed customer information without any recognized business necessity, and that, despite repeated instructions from the legal department, the plaintiff sent emails to executives expressing dissatisfaction with the relocation, constitute grounds for disciplinary action. However, it cannot be acknowledged that these actions led to significant damage to the defendant's credibility or to any specific, real harm. Considering that no other disciplinary measures were taken beforehand, the disciplinary dismissal is deemed excessive and not reasonable in accordance with social norms.

The plaintiff has consistently expressed the opinion that the position transfer was unjust from the time of his reinstatement and that he has been granted the authority to monitor the defendant's business operations. The plaintiff has also testified that he will continue to take actions similar to the previous disciplinary grounds. Therefore, it is inevitable to conclude that there is a real risk of the plaintiff committing similar violations of business orders in the future. Given this, the defendant had no choice but to opt for ordinary dismissal.