I received a contract recently with some crazy terms, also there is no official translation to English. I speak English and some french only-

In german a contract has been issued stating.

On termination of contract I cannot practice in my market sector and profession in zurich for 2 years after leaving the company.

No for me,

1. As the contract does not have an official translation to any language i can speak or read, then the contract is void anyways.

2. The term violates human rights and i assume something within swiss law throws this in the CAN right away.

Are there any legal guys who understand swiss law that can inform on the above?

thanks

There is no legal obligation for them to provide a translation in English or any other language for that matter, the onus is on you to translate it so that you understand it correctly.
The official languages in Switzerland are German, French and Italian (and Romansch for çertain things) and these are the languages which employers are legally required to provide. They may provide an English translation as a courtesy to the employee but they are not legally obliged to do so.

Non competitor agreements are pretty common here so I don’t think they are doing anything illegal but I’m not a lawyer. Which human right do you think they are violating?

Agree with Belgianmum, there's no requirement in Swiss law for a contract to be provided in a language you speak. The official Swiss languages of Switzerland are German, French, Italian and Romansch and contracts must be in one of these languages. Whether your prospective employer provides a translation for you is entirely up to them - and note that even if they did it would not stand up in a court of law; only official language contracts will.

Non-competition clauses are pretty much standard in many professions here, though whether they hold up in a court of law I don't know. There have been some threads here on the forum discussing this so maybe do a search and see what turns up.

None of your "human rights" are being violated here. You can't work for any competitors in Zurich - then count yourself lucky that the contract only affects that small area. Usually it would be anywhere in Switzerland far as I know. And nothing would stop you getting a job in the same field in another part of the world.

If you want legal advice then go contact a lawyer, don't expect people to give you their services for free.

That said, I don't see anything illegal in it, but if you want to pay for a professional opinion....

Mind you, if you have such issues and concerns over this company at this stage, then perhaps it is not for you....

This is civil law not criminal law. You only have such rights in criminal law (Art. 68 Criminal Procedure Code vs. non existing clause in Civil Procedure Code).

In civil law there is freedom of contract and it is each parties very own responsibility that they understand the contract they sign. If the parties agree, the contract can be made in Klingon, however for contracts I recommend Ferengi. There is no stipulation that the contract must be in any of the national languages. Most often the language of the contract is decided by the party offering the contract. Sometimes, the language of the contract is part of the negotiation.

In the end one can neither force the other party to offer the contract in a preferred language, nor can the other party be forced to sign a contract in a certain language. Means if the if there is a disagreement about the language of the contract, no contract will be concluded. Be aware that for all the default clauses the Swiss Code of obligation will apply. Means, if something is not mentioned in the contract, the Code of Obligation will stipulate the default. Official language of the Code of Obligations is French, German, and Italian exclusively.

It is assumed that a party which signs a contract, understood the content, has the power of judgement, and capacity to act. This includes the ability to get a translation of the contract. The contract is only void if the other party provided a wrong translation, you lack power of judgment, or you lack capacity to act. If you do not understand the content of the contract do not sign it. (Also applies to other contracts such as fitness gym, mobile phone, internet provider, etc )

A non-compete clause which is limited to 2 years to Zurich alone will be very most likely upheld in court. I do not see any violation of Art. 340a Code of Obligations.

https://www.weka.ch/themen/recht/arb...urrenzverbote/

__________________
On Strike - ChatGPT knows more than I, so use it (or doesn't it?)

The contrtact is written in the language of the company, it is for you to get it translated.


If you not happy, don't sign, it really is that simple !

WRONG!

Tom

It's called a 'restrictive practices' clause and is very common round the world...

What gives you the idea a contract has to be in English in Switzerland??

And if you feel this infringes on your human rights, whatever that may be here, don‘t sign. As simple as that.

A non-compete clause, quite common. Question is whether it is enforceable. For example if you are a plumber and signed a contract barring you from working as a plumber for 2 years after leaving the company, that would be deemed null and void in short order in court - after all, they can't realistically expect you to be unemployed for two years? Or change profession completely? This is why most contracts also include a clause that states that if any one part of the contract is deemed not binding, then this does not negate the rest of the contract.

However the clause you've cited (it would depend on the exact wording) would likely hold up in court IMHO. All it says is you can't practice in (canton) Zurich, but there's nothing stopping you practicing in Zug, for example.

If unsure, consult a lawyer though, rather than some strangers on the Interweb.

Of course it's not void but if the employer provides a contract in a language that a candidate doesn't understand, it's a red flag.

Simple:
- ask for the contract digitally --> use any translator --> I think you will mostly understand everything from it (might be easier to translate FR to EN thou)
- 2 years is a lot --> so either they are paying you a fortune, or if not --> check what other clauses are there --> in the EU, most companies use 3 months, for 2 years I am thinking CEO
BTW -> nothing is illegal here, you are a grown man, you can use any tools you want to check the contract, and you have the power to agree or not agree with the contract.
A different example: maybe you have a subscription or signed something with a company: even if the employee speaks EN, probably most of the paper work was done in DE --> up to you if you sign blindingly or translate and read the full contract
Good luck

Hardly !


Why should the employer provide a contract in a language that he is unfamiliar with and is not an official language of the jurisdiction of the country where the contract is based ?


Why would anybody take such a risk ?


It is for the employee to either understand the contract or get it translated at his own risk and expense.


The legal contract will be the one provided by the employer and will be the one to resolve any legal problems later on.

As a starter, the employee doesn't speak German. How do you expect to work and communicate with the employee? Or does the employee have English as a business language for all topics, except employment contracts?

I had once a contract in English, but it was a Swiss Uni spin-off where the company language was English and most of the workforce consisted of expats.
But I consider that an exception and I agree with Biro.

Daily activities in English, paperwork meetings and legal documents in German... I've seen that before.

this is an interesting post.

if its an international firm or if your work is in English then yes it is reasonable to expect an English contract from an international firm. please ask them if they can provide one if you haven't already.

as for the non compete, that is blatant prohibition of trade and is illegal. a firm can make you sign a non compete not to work on certain clients but not stop you doing your work.

I would stay away from this, for me there are already two clear red flags.

Actually no .

Swiss law provides that an employee:

"may give the employer a written undertaking to refrain from engaging in any activity that competes with the employer once the employment relationship has ended and in particular to refrain from running a rival business for his own account or from working for or participating in such a business.

The prohibition must be appropriately restricted with regard to place, time and scope such that it does not unfairly compromise the employee’s future economic activity. In principle, there is a designated maximum duration of three years.”

you put it more elegantly but that's what I am saying

No it isn't per se. As said it is based on Art. 340 and Art. 340a Code of Obligations.


Considering it is limited to Zurich this will very most likely upheld in court (IF all the other conditions are met as well).

yes you get non competes but I am addressing the OPs point: "On termination of contract I cannot practice in my market sector and profession in zurich for 2 years after leaving the company."