Dismissal of the complaint regarding damages and satisfaction claims due to an employment reference

Facts

The complainant, [X.] , was employed in the security department of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (ETHZ) since 1981. On September 9, 2003, the ETHZ filed a criminal complaint against [X.] and terminated his employment with immediate effect. By decision of October 27, 2003, the President of the ETHZ terminated the employment relationship on April 30, 2004, due to violation of statutory and contractual duties. [X.] filed a complaint with the Federal Administrative Court and later with the Federal Supreme Court.

The Federal Administrative Court overturned the decision of the ETH complaints commission and confirmed the termination of the employment relationship on April 30, 2004. It obliged the ETHZ to pay [X.] compensation in the amount of a gross annual salary plus 5 percent interest since May 1, 2004.

[X.] submitted a request to the ETHZ for damages and satisfaction due to forgery and issuance of a coded employment reference, as well as false testimony in an administrative procedure. The ETHZ did not entertain the claim for damages and satisfaction.

The Federal Administrative Court stayed the proceedings and later lifted the stay. It partially upheld the complaint in the sense of the considerations and obliged the ETHZ to issue [X.] an employment reference that did not disadvantage him.

Considerations

1. Admissibility of the complaint

The complaint in public law matters is admissible, as the threshold of CHF 30,000 has been reached.

2. Damages and satisfaction claim

The complainant derives his claim for damages and satisfaction from the fact that the employment reference issued on August 30, 2004, contained coded statements and hinted at a termination without notice. The lower court considered that the claim was not barred by limitation, as the complainant only recognized the damaging effects of the employment reference on June 22, 2006.

3. Illegality of the employment reference

The lower court found that the employment reference was illegal, as it created the impression that the complainant had been terminated without notice. The second version of the employment reference was problematic because the…