Legislator Rechtsprechung & Gesetzgebung
DE FR IT EN
In Legislator analysieren
KKO 3591/1999 KI-generiert

Supreme Court rules that a new contract between original and new employer does not constitute a business transfer under Finnish law.

Geschäftsnummer KKO 3591/1999
Gericht / Behörde
Rechtsordnung Finnland (FI)
Entscheiddatum
Ausgang Abgewiesen (Dismissed)
Originalquelle öffnen Maschinenlesbares Markdown (.md)

Legislator-Zusammenfassung

KI-generiert

The Supreme Court dismissed the claim regarding a business transfer between A Oy and B Oy. The facts show A Oy managed hotels for X Oy, which later signed a new contract for the same work with B Oy. The court held that the new agreement between X and B did not create a transfer of business between A and B because no transfer of assets or employees occurred.

Legislator-Regeste

KI-generiert

Section 1 of the Business Transfer Act 1999; A new service contract between the original client and a new service provider does not constitute a business transfer under the Business Transfer Act if no assets or employees are transferred.

Schlagwörter

KI-generiert
business transfer service contract employer liability asset transfer employee transfer Finnish law KKO 3591/1999 Übergang des Arbeitsverhältnisses

Zitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen

KI-generiert
Section 1 of the Business Transfer Act 1999
KI-generiert
labour_2021_53
Union loses case as court finds union failed to prove employee was moved to a new workplace during business transfer.
labour_1997_22
Labor court dismissed claim for vacation pay based on expired collective agreement after business transfer.
kko-precedent_1996_11
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; bankruptcy trustee lacks right to terminate fixed-term contracts when business is sold.
labour_2010_122
Labor court dismisses union claim that collective agreement protects union rep during business transfer.
kko-precedent_1991_141
Supreme Court dismisses claim that business transfer occurred without explicit agreement between former and new employer.

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

A Oy oli sopimuksen nojalla huolehtinut X Oy:n omistamien hotellien kerroshoitotyöstä. X Oy oli tehnyt uuden sopimuksen sanotusta työstä B Oy:n kanssa. Kysymys siitä, oliko A Oy:n ja B Oy:n välillä tapahtunut liikkeen luovutus.