The ruling establishes that the employer can sue for non-contractual civil liability even if the facts arise from an employment relationship.
The Second Court of First Instance of Talagante recently issued a landmark ruling at the intersection of labor and civil law (Case No. C-418-2023). The ruling recognizes that an employer may bring a tort action even when the facts originate in the context of an employment relationship, provided that the alleged damages exceed the employment contract.
The case arose from a lawsuit filed by an IT services company against a former employee and related third parties, whom it accused of using confidential information and business contacts obtained during the employment relationship to divert customers to a new company in the same line of business linked to the defendant.
The defendants denied having acted maliciously and put forward three main defenses: (i) that the dispute should be heard before the labor courts, as it arose from an employment contract that had already been the subject of labor proceedings; (ii) that the liability was contractual in nature; and (iii) that the action was time-barred, arguing that the events dated back to 2017, meaning that the four-year period set forth in Article 2332 of the Civil Code had elapsed.
The court rejected all three defenses. First, it affirmed the autonomy of the civil action with respect to the previous labor proceedings, noting that the judgment of the Labor Court—which had declared the former employee’s dismissal for incompatible negotiation justified—did not prevent the pursuit of full compensation for damages under a different regime.
In this regard, the ruling emphasizes that the existence of a prior employment relationship does not exclude the application of common law damages: while labor law focuses on the validity of the dismissal, civil law seeks to restore the financial balance affected by malicious or concealed conduct:
“TWENTY-SEVENTH: That non-contractual civil liability has a place in labor law, regardless of the employment contract […] the analysis carried out in the labor court necessarily seeks to determine whether the dismissal […] was justified and proportionate to the facts invoked in the letter of dismissal, […] therefore, in that instance, a possible civil offense is not analyzed, much less the financial damage that it may have caused, as is the case in the present proceedings.“
In this way, the court clearly distinguishes the functions of both jurisdictions: labor law, aimed at protecting the contractual relationship; and civil law, aimed at full compensation for damages.
Secondly, the court applied the non-contractual regime of the Civil Code, considering that the damage did not result from a breach of duties under the employment contract, but from a violation of the general duty not to cause harm. It therefore classified the former employee’s conduct as an autonomous civil offense, extending joint and several liability to all the defendants in accordance with Article 2317 of the Civil Code.
Finally, the ruling accepted the thesis of “effective knowledge of the damage” for the purposes of the statute of limitations, specifying that the four-year period does not begin with the mere occurrence of the damage, but from the moment the victim becomes effectively aware of the damage and can identify its perpetrator.
In doing so, the court transfers a doctrine traditionally applied in medical and environmental matters to the business sphere, preventing the passage of time from benefiting those who conceal or disguise their unlawful conduct.
The ruling sets an important precedent for the development of tort law in labor contexts. Not only does it reaffirm the coexistence of labor and civil jurisdiction, but it also extends the doctrine of actual knowledge of the damage to the business sphere, consolidating a criterion of substantive justice with respect to the statute of limitations and reinforcing the cross-cutting validity of the principles of good faith, loyalty, and trust throughout the legal system.
For more information on these topics, please contact our team:
Jorge Arredondo | Partner | jarredondo@az.cl
Francisco Fuentes | Civil Litigation and Arbitration Group Director | ffuentes@az.cl
Elisa Elgueta | Civil Litigation and Arbitration – Public Law and Regulated Markets Groups Associate | eelgueta@az.cl
Be part of our multimedia platform and you can receive the latest legal news, events, podcazt and webinars.
