Facts
[A.] , born in 1971, worked as a gas station attendant/cashier at the company [Y. AG] from 12 July 1999. The company terminated his employment contract with immediate effect on 15 October 2003 due to allegations of theft or misappropriation at the workplace. [A.] then applied for IV benefits in December 2004. On 12 August 2009, the IV office of Basel-Landschaft awarded him a full IV pension based on a disability degree of 100% as of 1 October 2004.
The pension fund of the company [X. AG] appealed against this decision. The Federal Supreme Court overturns the decision of the Cantonal Court of Basel-Landschaft and remands the case for a new assessment. It examines whether the video recordings made by the employer without the employee's knowledge are admissible as evidence to prove the theft allegation, and whether the requirements for a reduction in benefits under Art. 21 para. 1 GSSLA are met if the offences are proven.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court concludes that the video recordings are admissible evidence under the given circumstances. Art. 26 para. 1 of Ordinance 3 to the Employment Act (EmpO 3) prohibits surveillance systems that are intended to monitor the behaviour of employees in the workplace. However, according to the case law of the Federal Supreme Court, surveillance systems are permitted if they serve purposes other than pure behavioural control, such as the protection of assets. In the present case, the employer's aim was to uncover thefts or misappropriation at the cash register, which constitutes a legitimate interest. The video recordings were also proportionate, as they were carried out only briefly and specifically, and did not monitor the…