Facts
On 2 September 1992, the employer C. SA dismissed the machine operator V. with immediate effect following a violent altercation with his foreman. V. contested the validity of the dismissal and brought an action against his former employer before the Labour Court of the Canton of Geneva, concluding for the payment of compensation under Art. 337c paras. 1 and 3 CO. The Labour Court dismissed the action, but the Court of Appeal annulled this judgment and ordered C. SA to pay V. the compensation provided for in Art. 337c para. 1 CO, while refusing that of para. 3 due to the concurrent fault of V. C. SA then appealed to the Federal Tribunal.Considerations
The Federal Tribunal dismissed the appeal and confirmed the cantonal court's judgment. It considered that the concurrent fault of the worker can only be taken into account for the determination of the compensation provided for in Art. 337c para. 3 CO, but not to reduce the claim under para. 1 of the same article. Indeed, the clear wording of the law and the preparatory work show that the legislator intended to depart from the previous case law which allowed a reduction of the claim under para. 1 by analogous application of Art. 44 CO.…