An employer who becomes aware of misconduct has two months to initiate disciplinary proceedings against an employee. By way of exception, this statute of limitation is interrupted if criminal proceedings are initiated within that period. The statute of limitation therefore runs from the moment the employer becomes aware of the misconduct.
The concept of the employer becoming aware, or being informed, of misconduct is broadly interpreted by case law, according to which the employer is understood to mean not only the holder of disciplinary power but also the employee’s line manager, even if they do not hold such power. The statute of limitation thus runs even if the line manager has delayed passing on the information to those with the power to initiate proceedings.
In the case in question, however, the line manager was certainly aware of the wrongdoing committed by the employee on the day it occurred, but had deliberately concealed it from the person with disciplinary authority.
It could therefore be inferred that the employer only became aware of the acts alleged against the employee on the date on which the victim of these acts reported them to the company director, meaning the two-month period for initiating disciplinary proceedings started from that date.
