The Constitutional Court adopted a new Resolution on civil and labor legislation - Summary
Based on the appeal of the Baku Court of Appeal, the Constitutional Court decided on the interpretation of Articles 2.3 and 882 of the Civil Code, Part 3 of Article 2 of the Labor Code in relation to Article 203 of this Code.
According to the decision: 1. The conclusion of a civil law agreement on compensation for harm caused by an employee to an employer, including an abstract agreement on the recognition of debt, is excluded; 2. Since the termination of the employment relationship after the infliction of harm does not release the perpetrator from material liability, the employer may apply to the court with a claim for damages.
The decision states that “both the employer and the employee are liable for damage caused to one another in the performance of their duties under an employment contract in the course of labor relations, not on the basis of civil law, but on the basis of labor law, and any civil law dispute between the parties related to compensation for harm caused does not require the conclusion of an agreement ...
In general, labor legislation defines two types of property liability: limited liability (in this case, damage is compensated in a predetermined limited amount) and full property liability (in this case, the damage caused is compensated in full). ..
In the presence of all three of the following conditions, one of the parties becomes liable for damage caused intentionally or through negligence to the other party:
- when it is obvious that the damage has actually been caused;
- when the action or inaction of the axircar is contrary to the law;
- If there is a causal relationship between the wrongful act of the offender and the result of that act...
The burden of proof that the employer and employee are liable for damages caused to one another is shared between the parties. When an employer claims that a specific employee caused damage to him, he must prove that the damage was actually caused by this employee and the amount of this damage, and the employee must prove that the damage was not caused by him ...
Thus, if the employee caused damage to the employer in the course of labor relations and this is properly documented, if the employee refuses to compensate for the damage, the damage can be compensated in court based on the employer's application. If the employment relationship was terminated after causing damage to the employer, the employer may also apply to the court to recover the amount of damage from the employee who caused the damage...
Since the issue is fully regulated by labor legislation, the damage caused by the employee to the employer cannot be formalized by a civil law contract. It should also be noted that among the limited cases provided for by the Labor Code, only one type of contract is indicated - an agreement on the assumption of full liability. The rules for concluding this type of contract are determined by Article 200 of the Labor Code. Employees who have reached the age of 18 and perform work or provide services directly related to the storage, processing, sale, transportation, use and other operations with property, material or other valuables entrusted by the employer, as at the conclusion of an employment contract and in the course of labor relations , and their full can conclude a written contract on liability ... "
You can read the full text of the decision by clicking on the following link: