In principle, employees who undergo compulsory training within the meaning of Article 7:611a of the Dutch Civil Code do not have to repay any fees for such training; their employer bears all the costs of course fees, books, exams and the like. Yet many employers include a study costs clause in employment contracts, which states that the training is not compulsory and that employees will have to repay the costs on leaving employment. If it turns out that the training was in fact compulsory, the clause is null and void and the employer may not recover the costs from the employee.
However, even if the training was not compulsory and the study costs clause is valid, the employer's recovery claims are not necessarily successful in all instances, as is apparent from a recent judgment of the Overijssel District Court.
The issue
An administrative assistant agreed with her employer that she would take a Modern Business Administration course. They entered into a study costs agreement stating that the costs amounted to 5,758.30, that the employee would have to repay the full training costs on leaving employment, and that this was not “compulsory training” within the meaning of Article 7:611a of the Dutch Civil Code.
The employer decided not to extend the employment contract and wanted to set off the study costs (which had risen to 8,400) against the final settlement. The employee did not agree with this, arguing that the training had been compulsory or necessary for her.
After the...
Singer and actor Nana has filed a criminal complaint for false accusation against the man who broke into her home and later filed counterclaims against her, Nana’s agency Sublime said on Friday. T...