The questions raised on this occasion are set out in the
following relevant questions.
Firstly, is it possible to bring an action declaring the
existence of an illegal transfer, even though the provision of
services has already ended when the action was brought before the
Social Court and, secondly, would the answer change if the
preliminary conciliation ballot had been submitted at a time when
the provision of services was ongoing?
The jurisprudential doctrine required that the employment
relationship should be ongoing at the time when the employee filed
the legal action for the declaration of the unlawful assignment of
workers, since its success required the continued existence of the
labour lender, since what was intended with it was the acquisition
of the status of permanent worker in the company of choice
(assignor or assignee), which logically used to happen in the main
company.
