Facts
The plaintiff, [A.], had been working for Bank X since 1976 and had held the position of deputy general manager since 1999. On April 29, 2002, he was terminated with effect as of July 31, 2002, without the bank making any specific reproach. The termination letter stated that the bond of trust between [A.] and the bank had been broken due to events that occurred at the beginning of 2002, related to unlawful acts committed by an employee in the department managed by A.
[A.] contested his termination and claimed payment of the contractual indemnities provided for. Bank X responded that the termination was justified, as [A.] had failed in his duty of supervision. The cantonal court condemned Bank X to pay [A.] a severance payment and an indemnity for abusive termination.
Bank X appealed to the Federal Court, contesting the cantonal court's decision and requesting the cancellation of the indemnity awarded to A.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined whether A.'s termination could be qualified as abusive. It recalled that art. 336 CO qualifies as abusive termination the notice given by a party without valid reason, and that the enumeration of cases of abusive termination provided for in the law is not exhaustive.
The Federal Court considered that A.'s termination had been motivated by the bank's desire to protect its image tarnished by the unlawful acts committed by an employee in the department managed by A. It estimated that this termination was abusive, as the bank had acted out of pure self-interest, disregarding A.'s legitimate interest in keeping his job.
The…