Facts
A., born in 1948, was employed as a primary school teacher in the municipality of X. since the school year 1984. On July 2/3, 2007, as the class teacher, he conducted a two-day school trip with primary school class 6b, during which an incident occurred. During a room check at 11:30 pm, A. found that despite the prohibition, four girls were present in the boys' room. A. then detained one of the girls, with the exact sequence of events being described differently by the parties involved.
On July 4, 2007, the school board, after hearing A., decided to suspend him from teaching duties with immediate effect. After further clarifications, the school board decided on July 27, 2007, to terminate A.'s employment contract without notice.
A. then appealed to the Administrative Court of the Canton of Graubünden and contested the legality of the summary dismissal. The Administrative Court dismissed the complaint.
With an appeal in public law matters, A. requests that the previous instance decision be overturned and the municipality of X. be ordered to pay him compensation. The Federal Court dismisses the appeal.
Considerations
The Federal Court states that when applying the cantonal Personnel Act, the case law of the Federal Court on Art. 337 of the Swiss Code of Obligations can be referred to. However, the practice that generally only allows summary dismissal for good cause within a few working days cannot be simply transferred to public law employment relationships.
In public personnel law, termination is usually issued in the form of a written and reasoned decision, often preceded by an investigation. Furthermore, the employee must be granted the right to be heard according to public law principles before the termination decision is made. In addition, there are the specific administrative procedures that do not always allow for an immediate…