After the signing of the departure agreement, it was found to be pregnant 3 days.

Search Follow in the upper right corner of WeChat (Iron Army Pu)

Rule of law

01. Guangxi men Laosha caulifted on the bell during the Spring and Autumn Period, and was sentenced to five years in prison for selling

Recently, the People’s Court of Liucheng County, Liuzhou City, Guangxi sentenced the defendant Tang Mousheng to the first instance of the cultural relics in accordance with the law.10,000 yuan is recovered and the treasury is paid.It was identified that the chime bell involved was the spring and autumn cicada pattern in the spring and autumn, which belonged to the national second -level cultural relics.

02. The owner is dissatisfied with the service and the property fee is kicked out of the group, and the court sentenced

Recently, a owner of Jinan, Shandong, due to the dispute between property services and property, has not paid property fees for many years, and the property company kicked it out of the "owner group".In January this year, the property company sued the owner to the court and asked them to pay the property fee.According to the court, the property company should be banned by kicking the owner out of the group chat.The person in charge of the property recognized his fault and made proper concessions on the request of the lawsuit. The owner took the initiative to pay the property fee and re -entered the "owner group".

03. The Ministry of Public Security: In 2022, more than 50,000 criminal cases involved in gambling involved in gambling

On the 27th, according to the Ministry of Public Security, the public security department of the nation’s public security organs paid close attention to the dynamic trend of the social security situation and the dynamic trend of illegal crimes of yellow gambling, and continued to severely crack down on prominent illegal activities such as organizing prostitution, opening casinos, gathers gambling, etc.EssenceIn 2022, a total of more than 50,000 criminal cases involved in Huangshan involved in Huangshan were detected and punished.

04. Male graduate students enter the female dormitory to sneak auction and theft are detained

Guangzhou Yuexiu Public Security reported on the 26th that in the early morning of the 22nd, a man in a girl in a university in Guangzhou was discovered.After investigation, the man, Tang Mou, was a graduate student in the school. He had illegal acts of sneaking the privacy and theft of others. The police had been detained in administrative detention for ten days.

Railway Lawyer Group Daily Public Law

After the signing of the departure agreement, it was found to be pregnant 3 days.

Editor’s note: The female employee and the company signed a negotiation agreement on Friday and received the corresponding compensation to resign. Unexpectedly, only a weekend, it was 17 weeks of pregnancy on Monday.What’s more?

Introduction to the case:

Lin Shi is an employee of a Beijing technology company.

On May 6, 2016, Lin Shiyin signed the "Consultation Agreement of Labor Relations" with the company, stipulating that the two parties agreed to unanimously terminate the labor relations on the same day.

On the same day, Lin Shiyin went through the resignation and transfer procedures.The company had to pay Lin Shiyin the above amount agreed in the agreement.

On May 9, 2016, Lin Shi sent an email to the company on the same day due to the diagnosis of pregnancy in the hospital.Re -negotiate agreement. "

The company did not agree that Lin Shiyin’s application for arbitration asked the company to continue to perform the labor contract in accordance with the agreed job of the Labor Contract, and the Arbitration Commission ruled that Lin Shiyin’s arbitration request was rejected.

Lin Shi filed a lawsuit with the court because he was dissatisfied with the ruling.Requires the cancellation of the labor relations agreement signed by the two parties, and the company is required to continue to perform the labor contract in accordance with the job position agreed in the original labor contract.The reason is that when she signed an agreement, she did not know the fact that she had become pregnant.

Judgment of the first instance:

The content of the agreement does not violate the compulsory provisions of the law and administrative regulations, and it should be valid

The court of first instance believes that the "Supreme People’s Court’s Interpretation of Several Issues of Application of Laws on Labor Dispute Cases (3)" stipulates that "Labor and employers will be terminated or terminated by the employerAgreement reached by economic compensation or compensation does not violate the compulsory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and there is no crisis of fraud, coercion or people, shall be valid.The people’s court should be supported if it requested an withdrawal. "

In this case, Lin Shiyin signed an agreement to terminate the labor relationship with the company, stating that the two parties have unanimously terminated the labor relationship and agreed to the amount of compensation.The agreement has been fulfilled, and Lin Shi has completed the departure procedures.The contents of the review agreement do not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and Lin Shi is not enough to prove that there is a crisis of fraud, coercion or people, and should bear the corresponding legal consequences.

For the controversy of the two parties, if Lin Shi does not know that the claim of pregnancy is true when the agreement is settled, will this situation constitute a major misunderstanding?: "In the following civil acts, one party has the right to request the people’s court or arbitration organs to change or revoke: (1) The actor has significant misunderstandings about the content of the behavior;invalid."

It can be seen that the object of "major misunderstanding" in the sense of civil legal sense is limited to the content of the behavior.When signing the situation of the termination of the labor contract agreement, the content of the behavior refers to the content of the agreement between the workers and the employer.

There is no major misunderstanding of the content of the agreement, and it is still signed in the negotiation of the agreement between the labor relationship and the content of the agreement is not fair.The legal consequences.

As for workers with complete civil behavior capabilities, whether they have the difference in understanding of subjective motivation, objective environment, and status, do not constitute a category of major misunderstandings in the legal significance.

In this way, Lin Shi did not know the claim of pregnancy when he held his establishment agreement, which did not constitute a major misunderstanding that he was sufficient to revoke the agreement.The agreed job continues to perform the request to fulfill its labor contract. There is no factual and legal basis, and the court does not support it.

In summary, the first trial judgment: rejected Lin Shiyin’s entire claims.

Lin Shi appealed because of dissatisfaction.

Judgment of the second instance:

Workers with complete civil behavior capabilities, when setting an agreement, have a understanding of whether there is a bias for their own conditions, is not a major misunderstanding in the legal sense.

The court of second instance believes that according to the rules of civil litigation evidence, the parties provide evidence to provide evidence to provide evidence to provide evidence to provide evidence to provide evidence.If there is no evidence or evidence is not enough to prove the fact that the parties are advocating, the parties with the liability for proof shall bear adverse consequences.

In this case, Lin Shiyin signed an agreement to terminate the labor relationship with the company, stating that the two parties have unanimously terminated the labor relationship and agreed to the amount of compensation.Both parties recognize the authenticity of the signing of the agreement. The agreement has been fulfilled. Lin Shiyin has completed the departure procedures.After review, the content of the agreement does not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations.As for Lin Shi because of the claim of the appeal, the signing of a labor relationship agreement is a problem of coercion and non -voluntary.The evidence provided by Lin Shi is not enough to prove that there is a coercion and non -voluntary situation, and it should bear the corresponding legal consequences.

Regarding Lin Shi because of the appeal claim that he did not know his pregnancy, he did not know that he was pregnant. If he knew that he was impossible to sign a termination agreement in this case, this situation was a major misunderstanding of the premise of the establishment of an agreement, and it should also constitute a major misunderstanding.The court believes that according to Article 59 of the Civil Law of the People’s Republic of China, if the perpetrators have significant misunderstandings about the content of the behavior, or if the civil behavior is not fair, they have the right to request the people’s court or the arbitration organs to change or revoke the revocationEssenceFrom the perspective of this regulation, "major misunderstandings" in civil legal sense refers to major misunderstandings of the content of the behavior.Specifically, the content of the behavior refers to the content of an agreement between the workers and the employer.The laborers in this case do not have significant misunderstandings about the content of the agreement, and sign the agreement on the termination of the labor relations agreement, and the content of the agreement does not have a faithfulness.The legal consequences of signature behavior.

As for workers with complete civil behavior capabilities, whether there is a bias for their own conditions when making an agreement, it does not belong to the category of major misunderstandings in the legal sense.Therefore, the appeal of Lin Shi did not know that he had become pregnant when he had an agreement on his establishment agreement, and the court did not support it.

Because Lin Shi did not know that his pregnancy constituted a major misunderstanding, he asked the company to continue to perform an appeal request to perform a labor contract in accordance with the work of the original labor contract. The lack of facts and legal basis, the court does not support it.

In summary, the judgment of the second instance is as follows: rejected the appeal and maintain the original judgment.

Source: Dawn Jun, Today’s Headline, Surging News, (2017) Beijing 01 Public Homorious No. 2462

S21 Double Wearable Breast Pump-Blissful Green


Posted

in

by

Tags: