Latvia
Supreme Court changes case law on termination during probation (Case No. SKC-35/2026) (case law)
Impact date: The judgment was adopted on 10 June 2026
On 10 June 2026, the Civil Cases Department of the Republic of Latvia Supreme Court Senate, sitting in an extended composition, changed its case law on an employer's termination of an employment contract during probation. Interpreting Sections 46 – 48 and 126 of the Labour Law, the Senate held that an employee has no right of action seeking a declaration that such termination is invalid, reinstatement or compensation for forced absence from work.
The employee can only bring a claim for compensation for material or non-material damage if the employer terminated the contract in breach of the prohibition of differential treatment or the prohibition on causing adverse consequences. Although Section 47(1) permits the employer not to state the reason in the termination notice, a reason must exist and, if such a compensation claim is brought, the employer must present it to the court.
For the purpose of ensuring uniform case law, the Senate also confirmed that the employer may terminate during probation before the employee has actually started performing duties if, after the employment contract was concluded, the employer obtains information supporting the conclusion that the employee is unsuitable for the work and has not passed probation. This may include statutory restrictions, false qualification documents, untruthful information or a substantiated lack of the required reputation or trust.
Employer implications/action needed Employers should continue to observe the three-day notice period and should contemporaneously document the legitimate reason for a probationary termination, even though it need not appear in the notice. Before terminating, the employer should check that the decision is unrelated to a protected characteristic, a complaint, whistleblowing or another protected exercise of rights.
Employer risk Reinstatement is no longer an available remedy solely for a probationary termination, but a discriminatory or retaliatory decision may still result in liability for both material and non-material damage. An employer unable to explain and evidence its reason in court will face increased litigation risk.
New Immigration Law tightens employer screening and substantially increases penalties
Impact date: The new Immigration Law was adopted on 20 August 2026, published on 1 September 2026 and comes into force on 15 September 2026
Following presidential reconsideration, the Saeima adopted a new Immigration Law on 20 August 2026. It replaces the previous law, recasts the immigration framework and transposes, among other measures, Directive (EU) 2024/1233 on the single residence and work permit.
Employer screening is strengthened. The EUR 150 tax-debt threshold, which under the previous law already applied as a ground for refusal or cancellation of a temporary residence permit, is now extended to the earlier invitation and summons stage: an employment-related invitation or summons may be refused or cancelled where the inviter has tax debt exceeding that amount. Additional restrictions apply where a labour-supply provider, or an employer recruiting for an elementary occupation in Major Group 9 of the Classification of Occupations, is an inactive taxpayer, was incorporated during the preceding six months or has tax-compliance issues identified by the State Revenue Service.
The law introduces a three-working-day decision period for an in-country long-stay visa application where fewer than three working days of lawful stay remain. The ordinary 15-day visa and 30-day residence-permit decision periods remain unchanged. By contrast, the deadline for the inviter or, where there is no inviter, the foreign national to notify the Office of Citizenship and Migration Affairs that the circumstances supporting a temporary residence permit have ceased or changed is extended from three to five working days.
The previous law already protected employment-based permit holders against automatic cancellation during an aggregate unemployment period of up to three months, or six months after more than two years of qualifying residence, subject to notification. The revised law carries these safeguards forward. It also broadens unrestricted employment access to family members of foreign nationals who themselves have unrestricted employment rights.
Employer implications/action needed Before inviting or employing a third-country national, employers should verify the person's right to stay and work, the inviter's tax-debt and State Revenue Service status, compliance with vacancy requirements and the remuneration stated in immigration documents. Mobility and offboarding procedures should distinguish the three and five-working-day notification duties and track updated visa and permit expiry dates. Labour-supply providers and employers recruiting elementary occupations should review the new eligibility restrictions immediately.
Employer risk Penalties increase substantially. Revised law also reduces the maximum duration of employment-based temporary residence permits from five years to one year, meaning that employers will face materially higher penalties for non-compliance and a substantially greater administrative burden from changes in work-related immigration policy.
Cabinet Regulation No. 478 changes radiation-monitoring duties for exposed workers
Impact date: The amendments came into force on 25 August 2026. Workplace monitoring completed before that date remains valid and compliant with the amended rules.
Cabinet Regulation No. 478 revises the requirements for monitoring and recording employees’ exposure to ionizing radiation, including the monitoring arrangements applicable to different categories of exposed workers and the division of responsibilities between operators and employers. Employers whose employees, apprentices or students may work with ionizing radiation or in controlled areas should review whether their existing monitoring, dosimetry and recordkeeping arrangements remain compliant.
Paper dose-record books are replaced by electronic records. When an operator stops making entries in a paper book, it must register the worker's doses for the preceding three years. Existing books must be transferred to the Radiation Safety Centre of the State Environmental Service by 31 December 2028.
Employer implications/action needed Healthcare, dental, veterinary, research and industrial operators using ionizing-radiation sources should revise radiation-safety programmes, worker categorization, contractor and student coordination, dosimeter allocation and electronic recordkeeping.
Employer risk Incorrect worker categorization, missing monitoring or incomplete records may expose the operator and the worker's employer to regulatory action and undermine evidence that occupational exposure limits and health-protection duties were observed.
Draft Law “Amendments to Labour Law” remains pending before second reading (Draft law No.: 1022/Lp14)
Impact date: There is no provisional date for adoption or entry into force. It is most likely that there will be further developments in this matter once the new parliament has been elected – that is, after 3 October.
As of 31 August 2026, the broad draft amendments to the Labour Law had not been adopted and remained before the Social and Labour Affairs Committee for preparation for the second reading. No material legislative step was completed during the reporting period.
The draft continues to cover, among other matters, an employee's immediate termination right where salary is delayed by more than two weeks, treatment of sick-child care periods when calculating the protected incapacity period, a four-day working-week agreement, possible changes to overtime premiums, reduced compensation during extended downtime and the continued application of an expired collective agreement. The wording remains subject to committee decisions and may change before adoption.
Employer implications/action needed No current policies should be changed solely on the basis of the draft. Employers should continue to monitor its progress, particularly where they use collective agreements, experience downtime, rely on overtime or are considering compressed working arrangements.
Employer risk N/A while the proposal remains a draft, the final scope and transitional rules are not yet known.
Draft Pay Transparency Law enters inter-institutional coordination after the EU transposition deadline (Project ID: 26-TA-700)
Impact date: N/A. The Directive-specific transparency and reporting duties are not generally horizontally directly enforceable against private employers merely because the transposition deadline has passed. Existing equal-pay and non-discrimination rules, including Article 157 TFEU and the Labour Law, continue to apply.
Latvia did not transpose Directive (EU) 2023/970 by the 7 June 2026 deadline. On 27 June 2026, the responsible Ministry of Welfare made an announcement for inter-institutional coordination, with opinions provided by public authorities and social partners by 10 July. As of 31 August 2026, the draft had not been adopted and does not impose obligations on employers. The obligations, requirements and actions previously described in relation to the Directive remain materially unchanged.
Employer implications/action needed Employers should map employee categories and pay components, test job-evaluation criteria for gender neutrality, review job-advertisement and interview templates, remove broad pay-secrecy wording, establish a process for information requests and preserve auditable reasons for pay differences. Employers approaching the reporting thresholds should test data availability now.
Employer risk Under the current draft, failure to comply with reporting duties or to ensure equal pay may expose a legal entity to a warning or a fine. Breach of transparency duties may shift the burden of proof to the employer, and non-compliance may also affect public procurement participation. These provisions may change during the legislative process.
Contact
Jānis Siliņš Co-Head of Employment, Partner, Attorney at Law
E: janis.silins@eversheds-sutherland.lv T: +371 67 280 102
M: +371 26 330 394
© Eversheds Sutherland. All rights reserved. Eversheds Sutherland is a global provider of legal and other services operating through various separate and distinct legal entities. Eversheds Sutherland is the name and brand under which the members of Eversheds Sutherland Limited (Eversheds Sutherland (International) LLP and Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP) and their respective controlled, managed and affiliated firms and the members of Eversheds Sutherland (Europe) Limited (each an "Eversheds Sutherland Entity" and together the "Eversheds Sutherland Entities") provide legal or other services to clients around the world. Eversheds Sutherland Entities are constituted and regulated in accordance with relevant local regulatory and legal requirements and operate in accordance with their locally registered names. The use of the name Eversheds Sutherland, is for description purposes only and does not imply that the Eversheds Sutherland Entities are in a partnership or are part of a global LLP. The responsibility for the provision of services to the client is defined in the terms of engagement between the instructed firm and the client.
Connect with us
