Tallinna 32: compensation for unlawful dismissal

The employee XX appealed the amount of compensation from the association for forced absence following an earlier finding of unlawful dismissal. The court increased compensation while maintaining a reduction for the duty to mitigate loss and partly allowed the claim and appeal.

Korteriühistu Tallinna 32 (now — Narva linn, Tallinna mnt 32 korteriühistu). Employee XX appealed the amount of compensation payable by Korteriühistu Tallinna 32 for enforced absence from work. Unlawful dismissal and reinstatement had already been established; this decision concerned only the amount of compensation. The court confirmed that compensation could be reduced by reference to the duty to take reasonable steps to mitigate loss. However, the first-instance court had not adequately justified limiting compensation to one month’s pay. The compensation was increased; the reasoning used eight months’ average earnings. The claim for the whole period sought was otherwise refused. The earlier reinstatement judgment was immediately enforceable: work should have resumed on the day after the first-instance judgment, rather than after the cassation stage ended. This affected the compensable period. The court applied employment legislation in force before 1 July 2009. Each party bears its costs in both instances; actual payment was not established.

Compensation was increased; the claim and appeal were allowed in part, with each party bearing its costs.