We defended the employer: DGK dismissed an employee’s application concerning wages
The employee asked for a check on whether the employer had paid his wages properly. After an oral hearing, the Commission dismissed the application.
What was in dispute
The employee applied to the Commission to check whether his wages had been paid properly. The employer submitted a response and the documents requested by the Commission, and at the hearing asked for the employee’s application to be dismissed in full.
The Commission found that
Each party must prove its statements
The Commission reminded that the parties must prove the circumstances on which they base their claims and objections. If a party fails to discharge its burden of proof, the circumstances it relies on may be found unproven.
The parties’ explanations on driver card data
The employer stated that the employee had not provided driver card data, although he had been asked to do so several times, so she calculated the pay from the data available. At the hearing, the employee said he had had no possibility of providing such data.
The Commission decided
The Commission dismissed the employee’s application. Parties who disagree with the decision may bring a claim before the District Court within one month. The Commission’s decision is an enforceable document.
Employee disputing how his pay was calculated?
In this case, the Commission assessed what data and evidence each party had provided. If an employee disputes your calculation, send us the employment contract, working time records, payslips and the correspondence with the employee. We will assess what to submit to the Commission in the response.
Unofficial translation of the anonymised decision of the CommissionKlaipėda Labour Disputes Commission · 10 September 2026
This is an unofficial translation of the decision of the Lithuanian labour disputes commission, provided for information only. The Lithuanian original is authoritative. Read the original (Lithuanian)
Labour case No. [anonymised]
OF THE STATE LABOUR INSPECTORATE OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA
UNDER THE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND LABOUR
KLAIPĖDA LABOUR DISPUTES COMMISSION
DECISION
10 September 2026 No. [anonymised]
Klaipėda
The Klaipėda Labour Disputes Commission of the State Labour Inspectorate of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter the Commission), composed of the chairwoman [anonymised] and member [anonymised], a representative of the trade unions operating in Klaipėda County, with [anonymised] acting as secretary, in the presence of the claimant [anonymised] and of the representative [anonymised] of the defendant [anonymised], having examined at a hearing of the Commission, in oral proceedings, remotely by means of communication (the “Microsoft Teams” communication platform), the labour case on the application of the claimant [anonymised] (personal identification number [anonymised]) against the defendant [anonymised] (legal entity code [anonymised]) (hereinafter the Claimant and the Defendant, together the Parties) concerning a dispute,
has found:
I. The substance of the dispute
On 3 August 2026 the claimant [anonymised] applied to the Labour Disputes Commission with a request to check whether the defendant had paid his wages properly.
The defendant submitted a response and the documents requested by the Commission and, at the hearing, asked the Commission to dismiss the Claimant’s application in full.
The Claimant’s application is to be dismissed.
On the individual labour dispute
Under Article 213(3) of the Labour Code of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter the LC), an individual labour dispute on a matter of right is a disagreement between an employee or other participants in the employment relationship, on the one hand, and the employer, on the other, arising on the conclusion, amendment, performance or termination of an employment contract, or from the failure to apply, or the improper application of, legal rules in the employment relationship between the employee and the employer.
The Claimant applied to the Labour Disputes Commission asking for unpaid wages to be awarded. By its nature, the Claimant’s application is to be regarded as an individual labour dispute on a matter of right, which falls within the competence of the Labour Disputes Commission and is to be examined in accordance with the procedure laid down in Chapter II of Part IV of the LC.
The Labour Disputes Commission finds that an individual labour dispute on a matter of right has arisen between the Parties.
II. The substance of the decision and the arguments
On the renewal of the procedural time limit for applying to the Labour Disputes Commission.
In the present case, the claimant asks the Commission to check whether the employer has properly settled accounts with him.
It should be noted that each party must prove the circumstances on which it bases its claims and objections (Article 178 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania (hereinafter the CCP)). The burden of proof is discharged by stating the legally relevant facts and the evidence confirming them, and by collecting and submitting evidence. Where a party fails to discharge its burden of proof, the court may find the circumstances on which it relies unproven (ruling of the Supreme Court of Lithuania of 21 February 2018 in civil case No. 3K-3-51-701/2018). Under Article 177(1) and (2) of the CCP, evidence in a civil case is any factual data on the basis of which the court, in accordance with the procedure laid down by law, establishes that there are, or are not, circumstances substantiating the parties’ claims and objections and other circumstances relevant to the correct resolution of the case.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly stressed in its rulings that, in assessing the evidence submitted by the parties, the courts rely on the rule of sufficiency of evidence, and that the conclusion as to the existence of a particular factual circumstance is drawn on the basis of the court’s inner conviction, founded on a comprehensive and objective examination of all the relevant circumstances of the case (ruling of the Supreme Court of Lithuania of 7 February 2011 in civil case No. 3K-3-35/2011; ruling of 18 October 2011 in civil case No. 3K-3-396/2011).
In the present case, the Defendant stated both in its response and at the hearing that the Claimant himself maliciously created obstacles to timely and proper settlement with him by not sending the employer his driver card data. The Claimant was asked several times to provide the data, but the employer, having understood that the Claimant would not provide it, calculated the pay from the data available.
In this case it is important to note that each party must comply with the obligations laid down in the employment contract. The signing of an employment contract creates rights and obligations for both parties. The terms included in the employment contract are binding on both the employer and the employee. At the hearing the Claimant stated that he had had no possibility of providing the card data and that he had not agreed with the employer on any specific pay at all.
In view of the circumstances set out above, the Commission, unanimously, guided by Articles 216 and 228 of the Labour Code of the Republic of Lithuania,
has decided:
The Claimant’s application is dismissed.
The application of the Claimant [anonymised] (personal identification number [anonymised]) against the Defendant [anonymised] (legal entity code [anonymised]) concerning a dispute is dismissed.
Parties who disagree with the Commission’s decision have the right, within one month of the date on which the Labour Disputes Commission’s decision was adopted, to bring a claim before a court for the examination of the labour dispute on a matter of right, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania (Article 231(1) of the Labour Code of the Republic of Lithuania). The claim is submitted to the District Court. More information: www.teismai.lt.
The decision of the Labour Disputes Commission is not subject to appeal or review (Article 231(4) of the Labour Code).
Pursuant to Article 230(2) of the Labour Code of the Republic of Lithuania, this decision is an enforceable document and is enforced in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure of the Republic of Lithuania.
Chairwoman of the Commission [anonymised]