Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
II PK 69/04 Généré par l'IA

Termination of employment by former employer after legal transfer does not end the labor relationship.

Numéro de cause II PK 69/04
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Pologne (PL)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal against a lower court decision that rejected the plaintiff's claim to return to work. The plaintiff argued that her dismissal by the former municipal school entity did not terminate her employment because the school had been legally transferred to a new employer under specific labor law provisions. The court ruled that a dismissal issued by the former employer after such a legal transfer does not dissolve the labor contract with the new employer, as the employee's status remains valid with the successor entity.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 231 § 1 k.p.; Art. 3 k.p.: A termination of employment contract by a former employer, following a legal transfer of the workplace to a new employer, does not result in the dissolution of the labor relationship with the new employer.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
legal transfer of workplace termination of employment contract successor employer liability labor relationship continuity municipal school entity dismissal by former employer labor law provisions

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 231 § 1 k.p.
Art. 3 k.p.
Art. 7 ust. 1 pkt 9 ustawy z dnia 8 marca 1990 r. o samorządzie gminnym
art. 231 § 1 k.p
art. 231 k.p
art. 87 Konstytucji
art. 87 ust. 1 Konstytucji RP
art. 3 k.p
art. 1 k.c
art. 300 k.p

Jurisprudence citée

Généré par l'IA
I PK 456/02, OSNP 2004 nr 19, poz. 335
I PK 456/02
Supreme Court quashes labor dispute verdict regarding municipal health task transfer and employer identity. The court found the employer was the municipality, not the health facility. The case is remanded for retrial to determine the correct employer. The court ruled that the municipality, not the health facility, was the employer because the tasks were not transferred to the facility. The court held that the municipality, not the health facility, was the employer because the tasks were not transferred to the facility. The court held that the municipality, not the health facility, was the employer because the tasks were not transferred to the facility.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet