Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
I PK 152/10 Généré par l'IA

Failure to follow an administrator's medical order constitutes a breach of duty justifying dismissal.

Numéro de cause I PK 152/10
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 filed by a doctor seeking reinstatement after his employment contract was terminated. The court found that the doctor's refusal to perform a specific radiological examination ordered by the department head violated his professional duties and justified the dismissal. Although the court acknowledged that doctors should not blindly follow orders, it ruled that the administrator's instructions regarding patient treatment generally bind the employee unless specific medical or organizational changes exist.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 100 § 1 k.p.; Art. 45 § 1 k.p.; Art. 8 k.p.; Art. 52 k.p.: Failure to execute an administrator's order concerning patient treatment constitutes a breach of professional duties and justifies dismissal, unless justified by a change in the patient's health status or other organizational/technical circumstances.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
medical employment contract administrator medical order professional duty breach justified dismissal reinstatement claim cassation appeal hospital staff duties

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 100 § 1 k.p.
Art. 45 § 1 k.p.
Art. 8 k.p.
Art. 52 k.p.
Art. 398 § 14 k.p.c.
art. 30 § 4 k.p
art. 45 § 1 k.p
art. 233 § 1 k.p.c
art. 52 k.p
art. 100 § 1 k.p

Jurisprudence citée

Généré par l'IA
I PKN 244/97
Polish Supreme Court dismisses appeal; blind obedience to illegal orders justifies dismissal under Labor Code.
I PK 187/06
Employer dismissed employee for poor performance; court requires joint evaluation of all reasons.
II PK 307/09
Employee held liable for entrusted property damage under Art. 124 k.p. despite lack of employer fault.
III CSK 124/09
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; possession acquisition barred because administrative expropriation proceedings did not target the possessor.
V CK 260/05
Supreme Court vacated appeal judgment on foreign currency debt conversion and remanded case for retrial.
II PK 82/08
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; employer's repeated misconduct justifies dismissal without notice period.

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