Compensation for unfair dismissal cannot be increased through legal proceedings.
29 July 2025 · Vilar Riba
The Plenary of the Social Chamber of the Supreme Court, in its recent judgment number 736/2025 of 16 July, has ruled that the compensation for unfair dismissal established in Article 56.1 of the Workers’ Statute cannot be increased through judicial means by adding additional compensation. This does not constitute a violation of Article 10 of Convention No. 158 of the International Labour Organization (ILO) nor of Article 24 of the Revised European Social Charter (ESC), which merely state that dismissal compensation must be adequate.
Background of the Specific Case
The issue raised in the appeal for the unification of doctrine that motivates the ruling under analysis is whether a worker dismissed unfairly is entitled to receive, in addition to the compensation for disciplinary dismissal under Article 56.1 of the Workers’ Statute, an additional compensation.
The worker challenged the dismissal in the first instance before the Labour Court No. 3 of Barcelona, which, in its ruling, declared the dismissal unfair due to insufficient factual content in the dismissal letter. The company was ordered to pay the statutory compensation under Article 56.1 WS and additional compensation for loss of earnings amounting to €5,410.36.
The company filed an appeal against the lower court ruling before the High Court of Justice of Catalonia, which upheld the appeal and annulled the worker’s right to receive additional compensation for loss of earnings.
The worker then filed a cassation appeal for the unification of doctrine before the Supreme Court, which has now been resolved with the judgment being discussed.
Supreme Court Decision
The Supreme Court, applying the principle of conventionality control, and as it had previously stated regarding Article 10 of ILO Convention 158, ruled that the mandate in Article 24 of the Revised European Social Charter (ESC) is not directly applicable and requires domestic legislative action. This article establishes “the right of workers dismissed without valid reason to adequate compensation or other appropriate relief.”
The Court found that the phrase “adequate compensation” is vague in literal terms. Therefore, it concludes that such provisions are not directly enforceable but rather require interpretation and implementation through national legislation, which must determine what constitutes adequate compensation in line with these European provisions.
Moreover, constitutional doctrine affirms that the statutory compensation under the Workers’ Statute is already considered adequate, as the legal formula under Article 56.1 ensures legal certainty and equal treatment for all workers facing job loss.
The ruling also concludes that decisions made by the European Committee of Social Rights (ECSR) are neither binding nor directly enforceable between private parties, since, unlike the European Court of Human Rights or the Court of Justice of the European Union, the ECSR is not a judicial body and its decisions are not legally binding judgments.
Conclusion
This judgment establishes that the compensation for unfair dismissal set out in Article 56.1 of the Workers’ Statute cannot be increased by judicial means with additional compensation. The Court considers that the current domestic regulation and its calculation method already provide an “adequate compensation” ensuring legal certainty for all workers, without violating ILO Convention 158 or Article 24 of the Revised European Social Charter.
