So far in 2025, several important Norwegian court rulings have clarified employers’ obligations under the Working Environment Act, employment classification rules, and collective agreements. Cases have addressed issues ranging from platform workers’ employee status and illegal hiring practices, to pay obligations under working hours averaging schemes and the classification of on-call duty as working time. These decisions highlight the importance of actual working conditions, clear agreements, and compliance with labor laws, providing guidance for employers across industries.
Oslo District Court (TOSL-2024-140889) dealt with a case concerning bicycle couriers delivering food via Wolt, assessing whether they should be considered employees or independent contractors. The court concluded that the couriers were employees, as Wolt exercised significant control over how the assignments were carried out, and the couriers had little bargaining power and were economically dependent on Wolt.
This meant Wolt had to permanently employ the couriers, pay retroactive overtime, holiday pay, pension, and compensation.
The ruling emphasizes that formal contracts are not decisive – actual conditions such as management, control, and dependency play a key role in determining employee status. Employers should review their agreements to ensure correct classification.
The judgment is not final; Wolt has appealed.
Oslo District Court (TOSL-2024-117828) found that Discovery Networks’ contract with Monday Sport, ostensibly for staffing services, was in reality illegal hiring of employees. The court emphasised that the employees were under Discovery’s management and performed tasks within Discovery’s core business, meaning they had not delivered a finished product as in a genuine subcontracting arrangement.
This resulted in the employees winning their claim for permanent employment at Discovery.
The court considered factors including:
The case underscores the importance of assessing the actual circumstances behind contracts with subcontractors, especially after stricter hiring rules in the Working Environment Act. Illegal hiring can lead to claims for permanent employment.
The case has been appealed and is not final.
Earlier this year, Trøndelag District Court (TTRO-2024-197027) clarified employer obligations when using averaging of working hours. The court ruled that the employer was obliged to pay wages even when there was no work, despite the employee having worked extra earlier.
The case concerned an 80% employee who was told to take unpaid leave after periods of extra work, before being dismissed. The court found the averaging agreement insufficient because it lacked a concrete work schedule, violating predictability requirements under the Working Environment Act.
The employer’s pay obligation applied throughout the 12-month period, unless the employee was laid off or had agreed to unpaid leave.
The ruling highlights the importance of clear agreements, work schedules, and predictability in working time arrangements.
The judgment has been appealed and is not final.
In case AR-2025-6, the Labour Court considered whether on-call duty at a fish hatchery should be counted as working time, entitling employees to overtime pay and possible retroactive payments.
The court concluded that due to strict response time requirements (in practice about 5 minutes) and practical restrictions on the employees’ ability to use their free time, the on-call duty fully constituted working time under the collective agreement and the Working Environment Act.
The court pointed to factors such as constant availability, an alarm system that could wake them, and other tasks like inspection rounds and extra work.
Employer considerations to avoid on-call being counted as working time:
Magnus Legal’s labor law experts have extensive experience with the Norwegian Working Environment Act and have successfully assisted numerous companies and employees with employment law matters. Reach out to us today to discuss your case.