Author: Rusul Al-Asfoor

The Supreme Court held that an employee who reports his employer's criminal conduct to the competent authorities performs a duty imposed by the Penal Law and does not disclose business secrets within the meaning of the Labour Law of 2003, which only protects secrets whose disclosure would give rise to competition in the employer's field of activity. The court also held that where an employee resigns and rejoins the same employer several months later, the second period is a new employment relationship, and the first period is not counted towards his period of service.

The Supreme Court held that a legal person can only be convicted of a crime committed by its employees if the judgment establishes the conditions laid down in the Penal Law and the Cybercrime Law of 2011, namely that the crime was committed for its account or in its name by a person acting in a managerial or representative capacity, or with its approval, cover-up, or gross negligence. A finding that the employee held a senior position and that the company's controls were weak is not enough. The court also confirmed that obedience to a superior is no defence to a criminal charge: a subordinate is not required to obey an order to commit an act that she knows the law punishes.