Issuing Authority: Guozun Cathay Associates, Denmark Office
Date of Case Closure: 4 August 2026
Core Outcome: The case was concluded through non-litigious mediation throughout the process, with the entry deposit and accumulated unused paid annual leave allowance fully recovered.
This case was jointly handled by the Denmark Office of Guozun Cathay Associates and the Foreign-Related Labour Dispute Resolution Team of its Beijing Headquarters. Strictly complying with Danish labour laws and regulations, EU labour directives, and the rules of China-Denmark bilateral judicial assistance, and relying on Guozun’s years of experience in cross-border labour legal services and dual-jurisdiction practice qualifications, the team delivered a full-chain, professional rights-claim solution for Chinese nationals working in Denmark.
This case has been selected for inclusion in Guozun Cathay Associates’ 2026 Typical Case Library of Foreign-Related Labour Disputes. Its case-handling model — “cross-border evidence compliance verification + rapid docking of local procedures + dual-jurisdiction legal support” — can be widely applied to the efficient resolution of cross-border labour disputes across the Nordic region.
I. Case Background and Entrustment Process
The client, a Chinese national and qualified Chinese cuisine chef, was lawfully employed in Denmark under a valid work permit. He entered into an employment relationship with a catering enterprise based in Copenhagen, taking up the post of Head Chinese Chef in October 2024. During his employment, the enterprise unlawfully charged the client an entry deposit, and consistently failed to arrange statutory paid annual leave in accordance with the law, nor did it pay any corresponding allowance in lieu of untaken leave.
In February 2026, the client formally tendered his resignation for personal career development reasons. However, the enterprise refused to refund the entry deposit on the grounds of “insufficient prior notice of resignation”, and also declined to pay the client’s accumulated unused paid annual leave allowance accrued over 22 months of employment. The client held key evidence including work communication recordings, salary bank statements, and shift attendance records. After multiple unsuccessful attempts at direct negotiation, he was referred to the Denmark Office via the Beijing Headquarters of Guozun Cathay Associates.
Given the three core challenges of the case — the validity recognition of evidence across Chinese and Danish jurisdictions, the navigation of local labour mediation procedures in Denmark, and the protection of equal labour rights for foreign workers — the Denmark Office activated its China-Denmark Cross-Border Labour Dispute Collaborative Case Handling Mechanism on the same day. A dedicated case team was established jointly with the Beijing Headquarters, comprising 2 locally practising Danish labour lawyers and 2 foreign-related labour lawyers accredited by the Beijing Lawyers Association, with full authority to represent the client in pursuing his employment rights.
II. Full Process of China-Denmark Joint Case Handling
This case followed a standardised collaborative model: the Beijing Headquarters leads client communication, evidence collation and overarching legal strategy, while the Denmark Office manages local judicial procedure liaison, engagement with the employer and mediation hearing advocacy. Written work records and verifiable deliverables were produced at every stage:
A. Phase 1: Dual-Jurisdiction Case Risk Assessment (17 March 2026 – 22 March 2026)
1.Beijing Headquarters: Completed preliminary sorting and verification of all materials submitted by the client, including the employment contract, salary bank statements, work communication recordings and shift attendance records. Issued the Legal Assessment Report on Employment Rights of Chinese Employees in Denmark, confirming that the enterprise’s unlawful acts of charging an entry deposit and withholding unused annual leave allowance were clearly established, and that the client’s claims were supported by sufficient legal basis and evidence.
2.Denmark Office: Conducted parallel legal analysis under Danish law, reviewed recent adjudication precedents of the Danish Labour Mediation Board for similar disputes, verified the business registration and employment filing status of the defendant catering enterprise, confirmed the enterprise’s legal standing and capacity to perform obligations, and ruled out risks relating to procedural jurisdiction and lack of proper defendant.
B. Phase 2: Compliance Consolidation of Cross-Border Evidence Chain (23 March 2026 – 25 March 2026)
1.Beijing Headquarters: Assisted the client in classifying and organising all original evidence, completed Chinese translation and timeline alignment for Danish-language work communication recordings, and compiled a formal evidence list in accordance with Chinese foreign-related evidence specifications, ensuring all evidence was lawfully obtained, complete in content and clearly correlated.
2.Denmark Office: Conducted formal compliance review of the cross-border audio-visual materials and electronic attendance records in accordance with the evidence admissibility rules under Article 22 of the Danish Labour Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Act. It supplemented and produced Danish-language evidence catalogues and evidence presentation notes, forming a complete evidence chain compliant with the requirements of local mediation procedures.
C. Phase 3: Letter of Demand and Mediation Procedure Preparation (26 March 2026 – 8 May 2026)
Chinese and Danish lawyers jointly drafted a bilingual (Danish-Chinese) Lawyer’s Letter of Demand, expressly citing Article 14 of the Danish Employment Act, Article 6 of the Danish Paid Annual Leave Act and the EU Transparent and Predictable Work Directive. The letter set out in detail the enterprise’s breaches of law and its statutory obligations to refund and pay compensation, and clearly notified the enterprise of the legal consequences of non-compliance, including formal mediation and arbitration proceedings and public disclosure of bad faith.
The Denmark Office formally served the Letter of Demand on the enterprise on 25 March 2026. As the enterprise maintained an uncooperative stance and refused to enter into negotiations, the Denmark Office simultaneously initiated pre-filing preparation for mediation, completing all preliminary work including jurisdiction confirmation, translation of application documents and compilation of filing materials to ensure efficient progression of subsequent procedures.
D. Phase 4: Formal Mediation Filing and Two Rounds of Hearings (9 May 2026 – 31 July 2026)
On 9 May 2026, the Denmark Office formally submitted a mediation application to the local Danish Labour Mediation Board on behalf of the client, with filing registration completed on the same day. The processing timeline was shortened by over 70% compared with traditional cross-border application procedures.
Between June and July 2026, the case team attended two formal mediation hearings. Danish local counsel led the evidence presentation and legal submissions during the hearings, adducing core evidence of the enterprise’s unlawful deposit collection and unpaid leave allowance one by one. Drawing on Danish statutory provisions and analogous precedents, counsel effectively refuted the enterprise’s defence that payment was excused by “insufficient resignation notice”, and clearly advanced the client’s claims for full, interest-free refund of the deposit and payment of all outstanding annual leave allowance.
E. Phase 5: Mediation Agreement Execution and Fund Settlement (1 August 2026 – 4 August 2026)
Following two rounds of evidentiary hearings and multiple rounds of out-of-court negotiations, the enterprise ultimately accepted all of the client’s claims. The parties reached and signed a formal mediation agreement on 4 August 2026. The Denmark Office oversaw the entire payment process, and confirmed on the same day that the enterprise had remitted the full amount of the entry deposit and unused paid annual leave allowance to the client’s designated account. The case was successfully concluded.
III. Core Case Challenges and Authoritative Solutions
The cross-border labour dispute challenges presented in this case are commonly encountered by Chinese workers employed in the Nordic region. Leveraging dual-jurisdiction legal expertise and extensive practical experience, the Guozun joint case team has developed a replicable, standardised resolution framework:
A. Unlawfulness of Cross-Border Entry Deposits and Refund Obligations
1.Professional Basis: Article 14 of the Danish Employment Act; EU Transparent and Predictable Work Directive
2.Solution: The team clarified the mandatory prohibition on entry deposits under Danish labour law, and relied on the unified protection of workers’ financial employment rights under EU directives to argue that the enterprise’s collection of a deposit was void ab initio. The obligation to refund the deposit in full and without interest upon termination of employment arises regardless of the reason for resignation or the length of notice given by the worker.
B. Calculation Standard for Unused Annual Leave Allowance for Foreign Workers
1.Professional Basis: Article 6 of the Danish Paid Annual Leave Act; official guidance from the Danish Labour Authority
2.Solution: The team submitted that unused paid annual leave allowance constitutes statutory labour remuneration, and its calculation base must include all regular income such as basic salary and fixed post allowance. An employer may not withhold the allowance on any ground, including voluntary resignation or insufficient notice of termination. All outstanding allowance for unused leave must be settled and paid in a lump sum on termination of the employment relationship.
C. Admissibility of Cross-Border Audio-Visual Evidence in Domestic Proceedings
1.Professional Basis: Article 22 of the Danish Labour Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Act; Agreement between the People’s Republic of China and the Kingdom of Denmark on Judicial Assistance in Civil and Commercial Matters
2.Solution: In respect of the work communication recordings provided by the client, the team conducted a comprehensive compliance review across three dimensions: the work-related context in which the evidence was created, the lawfulness of the means of acquisition, and the clarity and audibility of the content. Relying on the mutual recognition of evidence provisions under the China-Denmark bilateral judicial assistance agreement, the team successfully persuaded the Mediation Board to admit the audio-visual materials as core evidence for establishing the facts of the case.
IV. Applicable Authoritative Legal Bases
A. Danish Legislation
1.Article 14 of the Employment Act: An employer shall not require a worker to provide any form of monetary guarantee, entry deposit or property pledge. Any sums so collected shall be repaid to the worker in full and without interest within 14 days of the termination of the employment relationship.
2.Article 6 of the Paid Annual Leave Act: A worker shall be entitled to 5 weeks of statutory paid annual leave for every 12 months of completed service; unused annual leave may be carried forward for one year. On dissolution or termination of the employment relationship, the employer shall pay the worker an allowance in lieu of all unused annual leave, calculated at the worker’s normal daily rate of pay.
3.Article 22 of the Labour Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Act: Evidence including audio-visual materials and electronic communication records may be relied upon to establish the facts of a labour dispute case, provided the content is verified as authentic and the method of acquisition is lawful.
B. EU Instruments
EU Transparent and Predictable Work Directive: Member States shall safeguard workers’ financial employment rights and prohibit employers from unlawfully withholding workers’ funds in the guise of position guarantees, performance bonds or other similar requirements.
C. Bilateral Treaty
Agreement between the People’s Republic of China and the Kingdom of Denmark on Judicial Assistance in Civil and Commercial Matters: The competent authorities of the two countries may render mutual assistance in the service of documents and the taking of evidence in civil and commercial matters. Evidence lawfully obtained shall be admissible in legal proceedings in the other country.
V. Authoritative Practical Guidance Based on Case Experience
Drawing on many years of experience in Nordic cross-border labour legal services at Guozun’s Denmark Office, the following three authoritative recommendations are provided for Chinese nationals seeking or undertaking employment in Denmark:
1.Prioritise Pre-Employment Compliance: Before commencing work in Denmark, verify the employer’s lawful employment eligibility, firmly reject any unlawful fee demands such as entry deposits or performance bonds, execute a formal written employment contract, and safely retain all original employment documentation.
2.Maintain Regular Evidence Retention: During employment, systematically retain records of salary statements, shift rotas, work communications and other proof of entitlements. For discussions concerning salary, leave, post changes or other significant matters, keep written or audio-visual records wherever possible to ensure evidence complies with local admissibility rules.
3.Seek Timely Professional Representation: In the event of a cross-border labour dispute, instruct a professional legal team with dual-jurisdiction expertise in China and Denmark at the earliest opportunity to avoid prejudice to your rights arising from unfamiliarity with local labour law and mediation/arbitration procedures. Prioritise non-litigious mediation as a means of resolving disputes efficiently and cost-effectively.