Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
II 2021 55 • VG SZ II 2021 55 KI-generiert

Foundation for Flexible Retirement v. Limited Liability Company (Collective Agreement Contributions)

Geschäftsnummer II 2021 55
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Schweiz · Kanton Schwyz (CH-SZ)
Entscheiddatum

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

A foundation for flexible retirement for the construction industry sued a limited liability company seeking outstanding contributions mandated by a collective labor agreement that governed the industry. The defendant company argued that the contributions were not due because the specific employment relationship in question was not covered by the mandatory extension of the collective agreement, as the relevant collective agreement period had expired before the employment began. The court ruled in favor of the foundation, reasoning that the extension of the collective agreement remained legally binding for the duration of the employment contract, even if the underlying agreement had expired, provided that the contract was concluded during the period when the extension was still in force.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Foundation for Flexible Retirement v. Limited Liability Company (Collective Agreement Contributions): The defendant company argued that the contributions were not due because the specific employment relationship in question was not covered by the mandatory extension of the collective agreement, as the relevant collective agreement period had expired before the employment began. The court ruled in favor of the foundation, reasoning that the extension of the collective agreement remained legally binding for the duration of the employment contract, even if the underlying agreement had expired, provided that the contract was concluded during the period when the extension was still in force.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
Allgemeinverbindlicherklärung Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung Arbeitsverträge Bauunternehmen Pensionierung Beitragsdauer
KI-generiert

Fragen Sie sich, wie dieser Entscheid auf Ihren Fall anwendbar ist?

Prüfen Sie diesen Entscheid zusammen mit Bundesrecht, kantonalen Erlassen, Kommentaren und Folgeentscheiden in Legislator AI.

Fall in Legislator öffnen →

Volltext

\n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n II 2021 55 |\n |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n |\n Urteil vom 15. Dezember 2021 |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n

\n\n| | | |\n Besetzung |\n lic.iur. Achilles Humbel, Präsident |\n \n|\n |\n Dr.oec. Andreas Risi, Richter Dr.iur. Frank Lampert, Richter |\n \n|\n |\n lic.iur. Anna Maria Rüesch, Gerichtsschreiberin |\n \n\n

\n \n \n \n \n \n

\n\n| | |

|\n Parteien |\n Stiftung für den flexiblen Altersrücktritt im Bauhauptgewerbe (FAR), Obstgartenstrasse 19, 8006 Zürich, \n Klägerin, |\n

\n|\n |\n gegen |\n \n|\n |\n B.________ GmbH, \n Beklagte, \n vertreten durch Rechtsanwalt lic.iur. C.________, |\n \n\n

\n