Reasonable adjustments in supervening ineptitude: analysis of the Supreme Court ruling of December 22, 2025
Published 2026-06-29
Keywords
- Reasonable adjustments,
- dismissal,
- supervening ineptitude,
- disability
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
Abstract
The Supreme Court ruling resolves the cassation appeal filed by the company
against the declaration of unfair dismissal of a saleswoman. The employee was dismissed due to supervening ineptitude after being declared «unfit» by the occupational risk prevention service because of her physical limitations.
The Supreme Court dismisses the appeal and confirms the unfairness of the dismissal. Based on the recent doctrine of the Court of Justice of the European Union regarding disability, the Supreme Court establishes that a simple «unfit» report does not automatically justify the termination of the employment contract.
For the objective dismissal to be lawful, the company bears the burden of proof to demonstrate that, before adopting the termination decision, it attempted to implement «reasonable adjustments» in the workplace, offered the employee an alternative position compatible with her health condition, or proved that such adaptations would have represented an excessive or disproportionate burden for the company. Since the company failed to prove that it had exhausted any of these measures, the dismissal is legally classified as unfair.