Vagueness, unclearness and uncertainty. The Constitutional Court struck out
part of Section 2 on which provisions of the Labour Code are mandatory and
which may be derogated from. The Constitutional Court stated that this
provision, in relation to other relevant provisions of the Labour Code, is too
complicated and vague for its intended recipients, resulting in a breach of the
principles of comprehensibility and clarity of the legal order.The Constitutional Court also struck out Section
4 and part of Section 18 regulating the relationship between the Labour Code
and the Civil Code. The relationship between the Labour Code and the Civil Code
was criticised because of insufficient cohesion between the two Codes.
According to Section 4 the Civil Code is applied to labour relations only where
the Labour Code expressly provides so. Section 18 regards legal acts and states
which legal acts are subject to certain Sections of the Civil Code. The Constitutional
Court considered that this determination of the applicability of the Civil Code
is insufficient and brings uncertainty to labour relations. Consequently, as
uncertainty in labour relationships does not comply with the principles of the
legal state, the Constitutional Court struck out these provisions.
Constitutional
Court considered that this determination of the applicability of the Civil Code
is insufficient and brings uncertainty to labour relations. Consequently, as
uncertainty in labour relationships does not comply with the principles of the
legal state, the Constitutional Court struck out these provisions.
The status of trade
unions. The
majority of complaints by Members of Parliament related to the strength of
trade unions. The Constitutional Court considered that some of the powers
Do you have information to share with us?