04 March 2026

Pitfalls when filing an objection in cases of wrongful termination

  • Articles
  • Legal
  • Employment / Immigration
  • Taxes / Duties

In cases of wrongful termination, employees are generally entitled to compensation. However, such entitlement requires an objection to the termination that meets specific legal requirements. If these requirements are not met, an employer can successfully defend itself against a claim in court. This article outlines the requirements for a valid objection and for its successful enforcement in legal proceedings.

  • Manuela Fuchs

    Senior Legal Associate

  • Michèle Stutz

    Legal Partner

In Switzerland, the principle of freedom to dismiss applies. As set out in our earlier magazine article (wrongful termination of employment relationships), a termination may nevertheless be considered wrongful in certain circumstances and give rise to a compensation claim (Art. 336 et seq. CO). The employment relationship, however, is still deemed terminated. An exception may apply only in cases of retaliatory dismissal under the Gender Equality Act (GEA), which is not further addressed here.

Employees intending to pursue a compensation claim must lodge an objection to the termination. The following requirements must be met:

  • Form: in writing
  • Deadlines: objection no later than the end of the notice period, and filing of the action within 180 days after the end of the employment relationship
  • Procedure: the objection must be alleged and proven in the proceedings

Although these requirements appear straightforward, practice shows that they may create substantial hurdles for employees seeking to enforce their rights.

Written form and content

The law expressly requires the objection to be made in writing. This means it must be signed either by hand or with a qualified electronic signature. For evidentiary reasons, it is advisable to retain proof of delivery.

From a content perspective, it is insufficient for the employee merely to describe the termination as wrongful or to request compensation. The Federal Supreme Court requires that the employee expressly inform the terminating party that they do not accept the termination and that they wish to continue the employment relationship. This requirement is criticised in cantonal case law and legal doctrine, as it may be unreasonable to expect an employee to insist on continuing an already strained relationship. It is not decisive whether the declaration is labelled as an “objection”. What matters is the substantive content of the communication, which the court may interpret within the proceedings if necessary.

Deadlines

The written objection constitutes a declaration of intent that must be received by the terminating party no later than the end of the notice period. The date of the postmark is not sufficient.

If the parties do not subsequently agree to continue the employment relationship, the action must be filed within 180 days of its termination.

Both deadlines are forfeiture deadlines and failure to comply results in the loss of the compensation claim.

Procedural aspects

A written objection is a mandatory procedural prerequisite for claiming compensation for wrongful termination. The Federal Supreme Court has repeatedly confirmed that the employee must expressly assert in the proceedings that a proper objection was made and, if contested, must submit or offer corresponding evidence (the so‑called burden of allegation and burden of proof). If the employee fails to allege and prove the objection, the court must dismiss the claim.

If you have questions regarding wrongful termination or objections, our MME employment law team will be pleased to assist you at any time.

Click here to learn more about our expertise:
Back