Jugement Kantonsgericht (VD - 2020/462)

Canton:	VD
Case number:	2020/462

Instance:	Kantonsgericht
Department:	Sozialversicherungsgericht

Kantonsgericht Entscheid 2020/462 vom 11.06.2020 (VD)

Date:	11.06.2020
Force of law:	-

Summary:	Summary in 5 sentences in German: The plaintiff, a former pharmaceutical and commercial employee, became incapacitated and applied for unemployment benefits. The unemployment Insurance fund rejected the application because the applicant was not sufficiently willing to work. The plaintiff brought an action before the Social Security courts, which awarded her the right to unemployment benefits. The court found that the plaintiff was willing to work, as she was actively seeking a new job. The Unemployment Insurance Fund was ordered to pay the applicant unemployment benefits. More detailed summary: The plaintiff, e.g.________, was registered on April 1, 2017 at Pharmacie [...] in [...] employed as a pharmaceutical-commercial employee. On July 31, 2018, she terminated the employment relationship at her own request. After registering with the Unemployment Insurance Fund of the Canton of Zurich, she became unemployed on August 1, 2018. She applied for several positions, but did not receive employment. On December 10, 2018, she applied for unemployment benefits at the Unemployment Insurance Fund. The Unemployment Insurance Fund rejected the application because it considered that the applicant was not sufficiently willing to work. The plaintiff brought an action before the social Insurance courts of the Canton of Zurich. The court agreed with the applicant and found that she was willing to work. The court came to the conclusion that the plaintiff was actively trying to find a new job. She had applied for several jobs and had also participated in an application training. The Unemployment Insurance Fund was ordered to pay the applicant unemployment benefits. Remarks: The judgment is important because it makes it clear that the willingness to work may not be judged only by the number of applications. Other factors, such as participation in application training, can also be taken into account. The verdict is also important for the plaintiff, since she is now entitled to unemployment benefits.
Rule of Law:	Art. 100 LTF;Art. 56 LP;Art. 60 LP;
BGE reference::	-
Comment:

Please note that there is no claim to topicality/accuracy/format and/or completeness and that therefore any guarantee is excluded. Original decisions may be ordered or made on the basis of the competent court.

Click here to return to the page search engine.