The confidence that a coffee table conversation is enough for a final goodbye often costs entrepreneurs tens of thousands in unexpected damage claims. As soon as agreements are not set in stone, you lose control and the court takes over with significant consequences for your annual figures.
You might think a verbal commitment from an employee is enough to end the working relationship. In practice, a handshake without official papers proves worthless under the law. An employee can always change their mind later, especially if there is no signature on a settlement agreement. As soon as the employee denies the deal, you are legally empty handed and remain the employer in the eyes of the law.
If you stop salary payments yourself because you assume the departure is final, you create a major risk. The court does not see this as a completed deal, but as a unilateral termination. This is seriously culpable conduct, which directly leads to fair compensation on top of the standard transition payment. You then end up in a legal battle where you not only keep paying wages but also collect heavy damage claims that you could have easily prevented by documenting the process correctly.
In a ruling by the district court (ECLI:NL:RBROT:2026:14326), the judge saw that the employer wrongly believed a settlement agreement had been reached. Even though the employee had not signed and sought legal assistance, the employer stood their ground and stopped wage payments. The court ruled that no agreement existed, overturned the termination, and ordered the employer to pay back wages, a high transition payment, and a hefty fair compensation. This shows that you lose control as soon as you rely blindly on your own assumptions instead of a signed settlement agreement.
In ECLI:NL:RBROT:2026:14326, the district court ruled that no termination by mutual consent had taken place. The employer had offered a settlement agreement, but the employee never signed it. The employee's silence could not be seen as acceptance. The letter in which the employer stated that the contract had ended as of April 1, 2026, was qualified by the court as a unilateral, invalid termination. The court overturned this termination and ordered the employer to pay overdue salary, interest, statutory increases, and a substantial fair compensation of € 100,000 for seriously culpable conduct.
A court proceeding is never the final destination you hope for as an entrepreneur. You lose not only your business focus but also the power to determine the terms of departure yourself. Mediation could have made a difference in this phase by safeguarding the legal requirements for a valid departure. Parties could have sat down with a neutral mediator at an early stage to reach a conclusive settlement agreement. Unfortunately, in this case, the entrepreneur was too convinced that everything was already finished, causing the willingness to negotiate to evaporate. If they had chosen mediation in time, a definitive agreement would have been the result instead of a costly court ruling.
Pros:
Cons:
More on the risks of legal proceedings can be found in why a lawsuit over dismissal often causes more problems.
Ontdek waarom een juridische strijd na een geweldsincident op de werkvloer vaak averechts werkt en hoe mediation de bedrijfscultuur kan redden.
Voorkom sluipende escalatie en productiviteitsverlies in je team met pre-mediation. Ontdek wanneer een vroegtijdige interventie de kern van het probleem oplost.
Een arbeidsconflict binnen het managementteam vraagt meer dan een juridisch vonnis. Ontdek waarom mediation essentieel is voor herstel en professionele groei.
Feel free to contact me for personal advice.
We use anonymous cookies to understand how the website is used and to improve it. No tracking, no advertising, no sharing with third parties.