The High Court of Justice of the Balearic Islands has annulled a ruling that upheld the disciplinary dismissal of a waitress in Ibiza after finding that the original judgment failed to identify clearly which of the 15 alleged workplace irregularities had actually been proven.

The case concerns a waitress who was dismissed on 2 July 2024 after her employer accused her of four categories of workplace misconduct involving 15 alleged incidents over two working days.

The Ibiza Labour Court initially ruled in favour of the employer on 11 May 2026, declaring the dismissal justified. However, the waitress appealed, arguing that the judgment did not explain which specific allegations had been established as facts.

In a decision dated 21 October 2026, the Social Chamber of the High Court of Justice of the Balearic Islands (TSJIB) accepted that the first-instance judgment lacked the necessary detail and ordered the case to return to the Ibiza Labour Court for a new decision.

Fifteen Alleged Irregularities During Two Working Days

The employer's disciplinary allegations involved four categories of workplace misconduct, covering a total of 15 alleged incidents.

Among the issues examined were four services that were allegedly not registered or charged correctly, as well as discrepancies between drinks served and the quantities recorded or invoiced.

According to the reporting of the judicial proceedings, the first-instance judgment referred to discrepancies occurring on up to nine occasions. However, it did not sufficiently describe the circumstances surrounding each incident or establish clearly which of the allegations had been proven.

The company had also previously informed the employee that video surveillance cameras were in use for security purposes and to monitor compliance with workplace obligations. The waitress had signed a document acknowledging that information.

The employee disputed the allegations following her dismissal, arguing that the incidents attributed to her were not true and that, in any event, they were not serious enough to justify terminating her employment.

The Waitress Had Worked for the Company Since 2016

The case concerns a worker employed under a full-time permanent seasonal contract, known in Spain as fijo discontinuo.

She had been working for the company since 15 August 2016 and received a daily salary of €75.54, including the proportional allocation of additional salary payments.

Before the dismissal, she had also received a disciplinary sanction for a serious offence on 23 August 2023.

The employer communicated the disciplinary dismissal on 2 July 2024. The waitress subsequently challenged the decision through the labour courts.

On 11 May 2026, the Ibiza Labour Court rejected her claim and declared the dismissal justified, absolving the company of the claims brought against it.

Why the Balearic High Court Annulled the Original Judgment

The central issue in the appeal was not simply whether the alleged workplace incidents had occurred. It was whether the original judgment had properly explained the facts it considered proven.

The waitress argued that the court had effectively relied on the allegations contained in the employer's dismissal letter without identifying which individual incidents had been established.

Her defence maintained that this lack of detail affected her ability to challenge the decision because she could not determine precisely which alleged actions had formed the basis of the ruling.

The TSJIB agreed that the first-instance judgment did not provide sufficient detail.

The Social Chamber considered that referring generally to the employer's dismissal letter was not enough. A judgment must set out the relevant facts and identify the conduct that the court considers proven, rather than simply reproduce or refer to the accusations made by one party.

The appeal court also considered that the brief references contained in the legal reasoning of the original judgment did not resolve the problem.

In explaining the importance of this requirement, the judges highlighted the legal uncertainty that would arise if allegations could be treated as established simply by referring to a complaint or report without specifying which facts had actually been proven.

Case Returns to the Ibiza Labour Court

As a result, the TSJIB accepted the waitress's appeal and annulled the first-instance judgment.

The proceedings will now return to the Ibiza Labour Court, where the same judge who heard the original trial must issue a new judgment.

The new decision must provide a sufficiently detailed account of the facts considered proven and explain the legal reasoning supporting the outcome.

The judge will have full freedom to assess the case again, provided that the new judgment meets the legal requirements for explaining its findings.

Importantly, the TSJIB has not declared the dismissal unfair, ordered the waitress's reinstatement or ruled that the alleged workplace incidents did not occur.

Instead, it has determined that the original judgment was insufficiently reasoned and must be replaced by a properly explained decision.

Further Legal Action Remains Possible

The appeal judgment does not impose costs and indicates that a further appeal for the unification of doctrine may be brought before the Labour Chamber of Spain's Supreme Court, subject to the applicable legal requirements.

For now, the dispute remains unresolved. The Ibiza Labour Court must reconsider the case and issue a new judgment that clearly establishes which, if any, of the alleged workplace irregularities have been proven and whether they justify the disciplinary dismissal.