Quevedo & Ponce - Noticias Legales
The notification of disability to the employer is not a requirement for special compensation in the event of an unjustified dismissal: Binding judicial precedent in Ecuador
- January 21, 2025
- Quevedo & Ponce
Resolution No. 001-2025 of the National Court of Justice of Ecuador strengthens the protection of labor rights for workers with disabilities or those responsible for individuals with disabilities in the case of unjustified dismissal.
Labor judges and courts are no longer required to verify whether the employer was notified of the worker’s disability or if the worker is registered as a substitute in order to order the payment of the special severance pay provided for in Article 51 of the Organic Disability Law. This regulation refers to the right to compensation equivalent to 18 monthly salaries, calculated based on the highest salary the worker received, in cases of unjustified dismissal.
Key points of the resolution:
No prior notification to the employer required: It is no longer necessary for the employer to have been notified about the worker’s disability or for the worker to be registered as a substitute to request the severance pay.
Only applicable requirements:
– There must be an unjustified dismissal.
– The worker must have a disability or be responsible for someone with a disability.
Protection for workers with disabilities:
This precedent applies to individuals with disabilities, defined as those with permanent limitations in performing essential daily life activities due to physical, mental, intellectual, or sensory impairments, as outlined in the Regulation of the Organic Disability Law.
Implications of the ruling:
- For workers: Their right to request special severance pay in the case of unjustified dismissal is strengthened, simplifying the legal process.
- For employers: The ruling imposes greater responsibility on managing employee information and complying with labor regulations.
At Quevedo & Ponce, we assist companies and workers to ensure compliance with legal provisions and protect labor rights. Contact us for advice on this important precedent and its impact on the labor field.
Más Artículos
Processing of Proposed Laws Classified as Urgent Economic Matters
Proposing urgent economic bills is one of the powers of the Executive Function; however, these must be submitted to the National Assembly for approval, modification, or rejection. In accordance with the Constitution and the Organic Law of the Legislative Function, a failure to issue a ruling results in the immediate enactment of the project by operation of law.
Tratamiento de proyectos de ley calificados como urgentes en materia económica
Proponer proyectos de ley urgentes en materia económica es una de las facultades de la Función Ejecutiva, sin embargo, esto se debe remitir a la Asamblea Nacional para que se apruebe, modifique o niegue el proyecto. Conforme a la Constitución y la Ley Orgánica de la Función Legislativa, la falta de pronunciamiento da lugar a la vigencia inmediata del proyecto por ministerio de la ley.
Fast Fashion in Ecuador: Legal Protection, Boundaries, and Emerging Challenges in the Creative Industry
The impact of fast fashion on the Ecuadorian intellectual property system, explaining which elements of fashion can be legally protected, which are not eligible for protection, and what the main challenges are for designers and brands when facing potential infringement.
El Fast Fashion en Ecuador: Protección legal, límites y desafíos dentro de la industria creativa
El impacto del fast fashion en el sistema de propiedad intelectual ecuatoriano, explicando qué elementos de la moda pueden protegerse legalmente, cuáles no son susceptibles de protección y cuáles son los principales desafíos para diseñadores y marcas frente a posibles plagios.
Piercing the Corporate Veil in Ecuador: When limited liability no longer protects shareholders
Limited liability is one of the main advantages of incorporating a company. However, in Ecuador this protection is not absolute. Courts may apply the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil and extend liability to shareholders or directors when the company has been misused. This has become increasingly relevant in commercial litigation and debt recovery cases.
