Threatening to kill colleague no grounds for immediate dismissal, Zeeland court rules

Earlier this year, a Zeeland organization fired a woman for threatening to kill a colleague. “I’d better not run into her, because I’ll finish her off,” the woman said, resulting in her dismissal. But the Zeeland-West-Brabant District Court ruled that summary dismissal was too harsh a punishment for the statement, and ordered the company to pay the woman over €10,000 in severance.

The woman started working in the organization’s financial administration department in early 2024. In February 2026, the organization suspended her, citing poor performance. She was accused of bullying, intimidation, and intentionally sabotaging and undermining colleagues. She had clashed with a specific colleague over gossip.

After her suspension, the woman had to hand over her computer to the IT manager, who escorted her to the exit. On her way out, the woman said: "I’d better not run into her, because I’ll finish her off; you can tell her that."

The employer believed she was referring to the colleague she had a conflict with. The employer dismissed her with immediate effect for making a “serious threat of violence.”

The dismissed employee took the matter to court, arguing that the summary dismissal was excessive and unjustified. She argued that she had not been referring to any specific individual when making the remark and was emotional because the suspension came as a complete surprise to her.

The employer argued that the threatening remark was not an isolated incident, saying that colleagues and clients had previously complained about her.

The Zeeland-West-Brabant District Court ruled in the woman’s favor. While the woman’s remark was indeed “threatening and unacceptable,” and the court found it implausible that the remark was not directed at a specific colleague, there are mitigating circumstances, the court said.

The judge called it “understandable” that the woman was upset by her suspension “and that she acted out of emotion when she made the threatening remark.” The judge also disregarded previous complaints against the woman as they had not been cited as grounds for her dismissal. Moreover, the employer could not prove that the complaints had been discussed with the woman.

The court, therefore, overturned the summary dismissal. The woman does not want her job back as she is already employed elsewhere, so the court ordered the organization to pay her over €10,000 in severance payments: the standard statutory transition payment of nearly €2,700, her salary covering the notice period amounting to over €4,300, and an additional €3,500 for the unjustified dismissal.

The woman had demanded €47,000 in compensation, but the court granted her a lower amount because she quickly found another job, so her financial losses were limited.