In his claim, the employee sued the company ‘Diconfor' when it was really spelled ‘Diconfo' – that is without the letter ‘r'. Therefore, in applying the above principles, correspond to the judge, not the plaintiff, to verify if these were two companies and who the actual employer was.
Key Action Points for Human Resources and In-house Counsel
In applying the principles of “search for material truth” and the “apparent employer”, the obligation falls upon the judge, not the plaintiff, to identify the worker's true employer.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.