The Court of Appeal reverses acquittal – “trial job” was considered to constitute employment

In a recently decided case, the Svea Court of Appeal has reconsidered Solna District Court’s acquittal and ruled that a shop owner was guilty of violating the Aliens Act by allowing a foreigner without a work permit to perform a so-called trial job in his shop.

The case concerned a man who was caught by police in a grocery store in Stockholm on October 10, 2024. The man lacked both a residence and work permit in Sweden and, according to the prosecutor, had worked in the store, which is why the prosecutor prosecuted the employer for violating the Aliens Act. In the District Court, the defendant was acquitted of the employer, as the court found that despite the fact that work was performed, it had not been proven that there was an employment relationship – among other things, there was no written agreement and it had not been shown that any salary had been paid.

The Court of Appeal agreed with the District Court’s view that the man actually carried out work in the store on the day in question. The crucial question was whether this work constituted employment within the meaning of the Aliens Act. Here, the Court of Appeal went against the District Court and established an important legal principle: that remuneration – that is, salary – is not a prerequisite for an employment relationship to be considered to exist. With reference to legal doctrine, the Court of Appeal found that the man should be considered to have been employed.

The Court of Appeal further found that the defendant had been guilty of the crime at least through negligence. The company was also ordered to pay a special fee of SEK 57,300 – corresponding to a price base amount – in accordance with the Aliens Act.

Conclusion and Significance

The Court of Appeal’s ruling makes it clear that even unpaid so-called probationary work can constitute employment within the meaning of the Aliens Act. The ruling underlines the employer’s obligation to check that people who perform work in the business have the necessary permits – regardless of whether formal salary is paid or not. The judgment may have some fundamental significance for how similar cases are assessed in the future since it was decided in a higher court, but above all it gives the employer a clear reminder of the importance of ensuring that applicable legislation is followed in all employment relationships.