The digitalisation of employment relationships has led many companies to use email as a routine channel of communication with their staff.
However, when it comes to particularly significant communications, such as a dismissal, questions arise about the validity of a dismissal by email: can a company dismiss an employee by email? Does it carry the same legal validity as a letter handed in person or a burofax?
The answer is not automatic. Although Spanish employment law requires dismissal to be communicated in writing, it does not set out a single mandatory method of delivery. For that reason, the courts examine each case individually, considering whether the company can prove that the communication reached the employee, that they were able to learn its content, and that no denial of defence rights arose.
Key points on dismissal by email
- Valid, but not automatically so: dismissal by email is accepted in Spain, although the courts assess it case by case.
- The company must prove receipt: it must be shown that the employee genuinely accessed the email and learned its full content.
- The Catalonia High Court (2024) ruled a dismissal by email unfair, as it was not proven that the employee had accepted that channel.
- The Canary Islands High Court (2022) upheld its validity where email was the usual channel of communication between company and employee.
- The Basque Country High Court (2025) held that the effective date of dismissal is when the employee actually became aware of it, not when the email was sent.
- Burofax and in-person delivery remain the safest routes; email or WhatsApp should only be used as a supporting channel.
Written communication of dismissal: an essential requirement
Under Article 55.1 of the Spanish Workers’ Statute (Estatuto de los Trabajadores), disciplinary dismissal must be notified to the employee in writing, setting out the facts giving rise to it and the date on which it takes effect.
This requirement has a clear purpose: to ensure the employee knows the reasons for the dismissal, can exercise their right of defence, and can challenge the company’s decision within the legal time limit.
Although this communication has traditionally been made by letter delivered in person or by burofax, employment law does not expressly set out a single mandatory channel for dismissal by email or for any other method.
The key question will be whether the method used allows the company to prove that the communication was effective.
Can an email be a valid dismissal communication?
Email can be considered a valid method of communicating a dismissal in certain circumstances, but using it is not without risk.
The company must be able to prove, among other things:
- That the email address used belongs to the employee.
- That the employee had access to the message.
- That they were able to learn the full content of the dismissal letter.
- That the use of that channel was reasonable within the employment relationship.
- That no denial of defence rights occurred.
Simply sending an email therefore does not, on its own, guarantee the validity of a dismissal by email.
The main difficulty for the company is usually evidential: proving not only that the email was sent, but that it actually came to the employee’s attention.
Is a contractual clause authorising the use of email enough?
For years, many companies included generic clauses in employment contracts stating that work-related communications could be made by email.
However, some courts have held that a generic clause may not be sufficient if it is not proven that the employee clearly accepted that channel as a valid means of communication.
To strengthen legal certainty around a potential dismissal by email, it is advisable to specifically regulate:
- Which electronic channels may be used for work-related communications.
- The employee’s express authorisation to use those channels.
- The obligation to keep contact details up to date.
- The validity of communications sent to the details provided until any change is notified.
Case law and differing court approaches
High Court of Justice of Catalonia: a certified email was not enough
The High Court of Justice of Catalonia (Tribunal Superior de Justícia de Catalunya), Judgment No. 2096/2024 of 10 April 2024, examined a dismissal communicated by certified email.
Although the company used a platform that could prove the email had been sent, the court found it had not been sufficiently proven that the employee had agreed to receive dismissal communications through that channel, nor that she had actually become aware of the letter’s content.
The court noted that a certificate of sending does not necessarily prove who opened the email, or that the communication actually came to the recipient’s attention.
For this reason, the court declared the dismissal unfair.
High Court of Justice of the Canary Islands: email can be valid when it is the usual channel
The High Court of Justice of the Canary Islands (Social Chamber, Santa Cruz de Tenerife), Judgment No. 741/2022 of 18 November 2022, upheld the validity of a dismissal by email.
In this particular case, the company was able to prove that:
- Email was a usual channel of communication between company and employee.
- The employee normally used that channel.
- They had shown no objection to receiving communications through it.
The court held that, although the Workers’ Statute requires written communication, it does not impose a specific delivery method, so it had to be assessed whether the communication had actually reached the employee.
However, this ruling responds to a specific set of facts and does not amount to a general authorisation to communicate all dismissals by email.
High Court of Justice of the Basque Country: the importance of actual knowledge
The High Court of Justice of the Basque Country, Judgment of 25 November 2025 (EDJ 2025/784152), examined a case of dismissal by email sent to the employee’s personal address.
Although there was no prior express consent to use that email as a formal communication channel, the court found that:
- The employee had previously received communications through that address.
- They accessed the message.
- They learned of the dismissal a few days after it was sent.
- No denial of defence rights occurred.
The court held that what mattered was that the employee had actually become aware of the company’s decision.
It also established that the effective date of the dismissal should be the moment the employee actually learned of the communication, not necessarily the date the email was sent.
This ruling introduces a more flexible test based on the effectiveness of the communication.
What is currently the safest way to communicate a dismissal?
Although dismissal by email can be valid in certain cases, from a practical standpoint the safest methods remain those that allow clear proof of delivery.
In-person delivery of the dismissal letter
Wherever possible, this is the most advisable option, with evidence kept of the employee’s receipt.
Burofax with certified content and proof of receipt
This is one of the most widely used methods, as it allows proof of:
- The content of the communication.
- The date it was sent.
- Receipt by the employee.
Other reliable methods
Such as registered post, telegram, or a notarial deed.
Email can be used as a supporting or supplementary communication, but using it as the sole method means taking on greater legal risk.
What about dismissal communicated by WhatsApp?
Unlike dismissal by email, using WhatsApp as the sole channel to communicate a dismissal presents greater legal difficulties.
The High Court of Justice of Galicia, Judgment No. 2070/2021 of 20 May 2021, held that a WhatsApp message did not offer sufficient guarantees to meet the requirement of written communication of dismissal.
Among the reasons given by the court were:
- The difficulty of reliably proving receipt and reading of the message.
- Possible conflicts with the employee’s privacy and data protection.
- The impossibility of requiring an employee to be permanently available on their phone outside working hours.
WhatsApp can therefore be used as a supplementary notice, but it is not advisable as the sole method of formalising a dismissal.
Dismissal communicated by email can be valid in Spain, but there is no general rule allowing this method to be used without assuming legal risk.
The courts examine each case individually, mainly assessing whether the company can prove that the communication effectively reached the employee, that they became aware of its content, and that they were able to exercise their rights without suffering a denial of defence.
For this reason, even as the digitalisation of employment relationships advances and electronic channels become more prominent in the business environment, it is essential to act with caution and use channels that guarantee legal certainty in decisions as significant as a dismissal.
Sound planning of workplace communication systems helps reduce risk, avoid later disputes, and provide greater security for both companies and employees. The same caution applies to other sensitive areas of people management, such as knowing what to do if an employee is detained or how to correctly handle medical leave.
At Blegal we are your legal partner for human capital management. We support you in preventing and resolving employment-related situations, however complex, offering solutions tailored to your company’s needs.
Our specialist, close and personalised advice is the solution you need to correctly manage every area of employment. Thanks to our team of experts, we offer everything from a recurring employment service, such as monthly payroll preparation and compliance with routine obligations, to the design of advanced socio-labour policies, equality plans and people-management strategies.
Because sound employment planning not only ensures compliance with current regulations, but also allows decisions to be made with greater security, efficiency and confidence.
Photo by Stephen Phillips – Hostreviews.co.uk on Unsplash
