Judgment delivered on 25 September 2014.
acting for A
FTF acting for The Danish Association of Psychomotricity
The Municipality of Høje-Taastrup
Rejection of claim by the courts, as the claim should be heard by a board of dismissal according to collective agreement
A had been dismissed from his position as a psychomotor therapist with the Municipality of Høje-Taastrup. The reason for the dismissal was that A's position had been abolished due to reorganisation in the Municipality. At the same time, as part of this reorganisation, two physiotherapists and one occupational therapist were appointed.
FTF for the Danish Association of Psychomotricity acting for A had raised a claim for compensation for unfair dismissal before the courts and not before a board of dismissal as was prescribed by the collective agreement which covered A. The case had been taken to the courts because A claimed that, due to its composition, a board of dismissal would not be impartial in this case. According to the collective agreement, the board of dismissal should have five members, namely two appointed by Local Government Denmark, one appointed by the Association of Danish Physiotherapists and one by the Danish Association of Occupational Therapists, while the umpire was to be appointed by the president of the Labour Court.
The Supreme Court held that A should either bring the objection that a board of dismissal could be impartial in this case before the Labour Court or raise a disqualification objection against one or more of the members of the board of dismissal once set up. Judicial review by both the Labour Court and the board of dismissal was regarded as offering full legal certainty, for which reason rejection of the claim before the courts did not constitute an infringement of Article 6 of the European Human Rights Convention.