JŠK Legal Flash
Is it discriminatory if increased severance pay is granted only to employees whose job is terminated by agreement and not by dismissal? Not according to the Supreme Court.
In the case at hand, the collective bargaining agreement granted higher severance pay if the employment ended by agreement for organisational reasons and not due to dismissal. The amount of severance pay also varied according to the employee's salary. Although the employee in question was interested in terminating his employment by agreement (to obtain increased severance pay), the employer nevertheless opted for dismissal. The employee saw this as discrimination and claimed increased severance pay in court. However, according to the Supreme Court, if an employer uses its statutory directive to terminate an employment relationship by agreement or dismissal, this cannot be considered unequal or discriminatory treatment. Nor can such treatment be seen in the fact that the amount of severance pay is differentiated according to the method of termination of employment and the salary level of individual employees.
(Decision of the Supreme Court of 18 May 2020, file no. 21 Cdo 68/2020)
What are an employee's obligations after returning from a holiday abroad?
The employee must first tell the employer in which country he or she has been in the last 14 days. If the employee does not have an exemption (for example, 14 days have passed since the completion of vaccination), he or she must present a negative COVID-19 test before entering the workplace. The requirements as regards the age or type of test vary according to the risk of infection in the country that the employee travelled to. In general, without a negative test or proof of an exception, the employer may not let the employee into the workplace. The only exception is when the employee came from a country with a low or medium risk of infection. Then the employee can be admitted to the workplace, but he or she is obliged to wear a respirator until the result of the test is known.
(Un)Safe necessary road
For a property to be used as it should, the owner must have access to it from a public road. But not all properties are directly connected to a public road. The owner must then agree with a neighbour to establish a right of use to pass through to his property. If they do not come to an agreement, the owner may request the court to establish a necessary road. However, the court will not allow the necessary road if the lack of access was caused by the owner himself out of gross negligence or intentionally. According to the Supreme Court, gross negligence in certain circumstances may be buying real estate without a secured connection to a public road. However, buying a property without secured access cannot be automatically understood as gross negligence. It is necessary to assess whether the buyer was aware of the absence of access to the acquired property at the time of the purchase, how he handled the information and whether he tried to gain access before buying. Therefore, if you decide to buy a property, we recommend conducting a legal analysis of access to it. If access is not secured, take steps to secure it before the transaction is completed, as the concept of necessary road cannot always be relied upon.
(NS 22 Cdo 3242/2015, NS 22 Cdo 2432/2016, NS 22 Cdo 1826/2020)