En
Submit your application

Had delayed paying severance pay? Pay the fine!

The first thing every citizen leaving his old place of work thinks about is how much money will fall on the card as a severance pay. Naturally, he wants more and that’s okay!

The employer who signs the dismissal order is thinking about how to pay less! And he can be understood too!

But, the opinion of both parties to the employment relationship does not matter at all, since there is a law that sets the terms, amounts and procedure for payment!

If the parties have disagreements that are not regulated by law regarding how much and for what the employer is obliged to pay the quitting employee, the problem becomes “the collection of wages through the courts“.

Get to the point!

“Grand Chamber  of Supreme Court considered the dispute (case No. 810/451/17) on the delay (non-payment, compensation) of severance pay and published the conclusion that the adoption of a court decision on the recovery of payments which established after dismissal does not terminate the employer’s obligation to compensate the employee for property losses”

So, the case concerned the interpretation of Art. 117th Labor Code of Ukraine in the context of compensation for lost earnings. Indeed, if the basis for dismissal was the employer’s failure to comply with labor legislation, then the employee has the right to receive compensation for this violation of his rights in the amount of three average monthly earnings.

Initially!

A citizen applied to the court with a claim against the employer-state-owned enterprise. He demanded the recovery from the employer of the average earnings for the time of the delay in payment upon dismissal.

The delay was due to the fact that the dismissal was challenged in court and its date actually shifted by several months.

The court of first instance denied the plaintiff and the appeal court also. The refusal was motivated by reference to the decision of the European Court of 08.04.2010 in the case “Menshakova vs Ukraine”.

It was said that an employee is only eligible for compensation for the delay period pending resolution of the payment dispute.

The plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court!

The case was considered by the Grand Chamber and “revealed” the mistakes of the previous instances!

The following was stated:

  1. Compensation under Art. 117 of the Labor Code is aimed at compensating the employee for property losses for the entire period of non-compliance, including after the adoption of a court decision.
  2. The ECHR in the above-mentioned case did not resolve the issue of the need to apply a particular rule of law and its interpretation.

GC-SCU clearly and specifically spoke about the fact that enterprises are obliged to carry out a full settlement with employees, including for periods of time when controversial issues regarding payments were resolved. 

25.08.2020

64

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN
Ukrainian Supreme Court on the loss of the right to use housing due to non-residence

By its decision in case No. 465/7083/13-c of 10.07.19, the Supreme Court of Ukraine provided a kind of housing legal advice, answering the question whether the fact that minors did not living in an apartment in itself was an unconditional justification for their loss of the right to use the living space. The question arose […]

Personal mortgage property of a bankrupt entrepreneur: is it subject to collection?

Cassation economic court of the Supreme Court “stood up” for the mortgage apartment of the borrower of the bank, delimiting the personal and business rights and obligations of individual entrepreneurs, as well as limiting the rights of claimants to this property. So, with the conclusion in case No. 922/4404/15, promulgated on 06/04/19, the Supreme Court […]

Judge goes to vacation – robbers set free!

The main “hero” of this material was a judge who went on vacation without settling all his current affairs, for which he was punished. In the opinion of the disciplinary body, which applied the sanctions initiated by the prosecutor’s office, the issue that the judge had to decide was not complicated and there were no […]

A decent pension is not an obstacle to claiming alimony

The duty of children to support their parents who need help is established by law! If the children do not fulfill it voluntarily, then the parents have the right to demand alimony through the court, and such family cases are always difficult, the court practice on them is constantly changing and supplemented, and it is […]

Legal conclusion governing the donation of a share in a joint-stock company

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, by its decision in case No. 909/1294/15 of 01.10.19, “annulled” the conclusion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in case No. 33/45-09-1388 of 22.12.09, with the help of which the courts considered disputes on the donation of shares in these most societies to each other. Donating […]

Successful litigation strategy of protection in case of drink driving

Professional legal aid often ensures successful appeals against the decision of the first instance court. See for yourself how events can develop with one fresh example. The pensioner, a disabled person of the III group, was threatened with a fine in the amount of UAH 10 200.00 and deprivation of a driver’s license for a […]

lacomics.org