Digitalization has transformed the way we communicate, and media such as email or instant messaging have appeared. Its use is even becoming established in the work environment, for notifications from companies to employees. In this post we analyze the most recent rulings on the validity of these means of delivering a dismissal letter and the issues to consider when they are used for that purpose.
In recent times we have been able to see how the emergence of new communication technologies has been gradually transforming the traditional channels of interaction between people, generating new dynamics, modifying speeds and even altering the frequency in which such interactions take place. In this scenario, it is increasingly common to observe how many companies communicate with their employees through email or instant messaging applications (WhatsApp or Telegram). And so the question arises: can a company also use these means of instant communication to notify employees of their dismissal?
Articles 53 and 55 of the Workers’ Statute, which regulate the form and effects of termination due to objective dismissal and disciplinary dismissal respectively, establish the duty to notify in writing the dismissal, but do not specify the appropriate means by which the company must do so.
It has been the courts and tribunals that, questioned by the employee about the validity of the notification of the dismissal letter, have ruled on whether the means used is correct, adequate and suitable.
In this previous post we analyze the judgments of the High Court of Justice of Galicia (of May 20, 2021) and the High Court of Justice of the Canary Islands (of November 18, 2022). But how has this subject evolved in recent years? Since then, for example, the following courts have ruled on this matter:
- The High Court of Justice of Catalonia, which, in its judgment of 10 April 2024, did not consider it proven that the employee had “accepted the email address as the address to receive correspondence” and therefore concluded that the communication of the dismissal through that channel was not correct.
- The High Court of Justice of Madrid, which, in its judgment of 5 July 2024, considered that the letter of dismissal was validly notified via an email sent by the company through an electronic communication application endorsed by the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Digital Transformation that allows certification of its traceability to be obtained.
- The High Court of Justice of the Basque Country, which, in its judgment of 16 September 2025, in a case in which a company sent the letter of dismissal to a permanent-discontinuous employee by certified mail (burofax) on up to two occasions, “also tried to do so through the Signaturit telematic platform, and also through a WhatsApp message”, concluded that “such channels seem to us to be fully suitable, the latter being, moreover, a habitual means of communication with the employee”, although it stresses the complementary nature of such means of communication in relation to the previous attempts to deliver a certified mail (burofax).
In short, there is no legal prohibition that prevents the use of e-mails or other telecommunication technologies for the notification of a dismissal, nor do the courts and tribunals categorically consider them as an unsuitable means. However, the specific circumstances of the case must be reviewed, to evaluate, in particular, whether the person to be dismissed has given their consent to the receipt of business communications through telematic channels, whether these are usual channels of communication between the company and the person, or whether the person themself has used them in the past, for example.
The company must also assess the traceability of the medium it uses, to be able to prove, if necessary, that the communication took place.
