Mutual Exit Agreement

In principle, statutory compensation related to the termination of an employment contract (severance pay and severance pay) does not in principle apply to valid reciprocal cancellation agreements. However, the parties may agree on another scheme for the payment of such compensation. In addition, when considering the „reasonable value“ criteria, the Supreme Court ensures that compensation and additional payments are made as a valid factor for the mutual termination agreement. The Labour Act does not provide for specific regulations on mutual cancellation agreements. However, Supreme Court decisions have repeatedly stressed that reciprocal cancellation agreements, since they are legally „cancellation agreements“, are subject to the general provisions of the law of obligations. If one party wants to terminate the contract, but not the other, this can lead to problems with the contracts. If the termination is reciprocal, there are no negative or negative consequences, unless the contract concerns other contracts. The contract is no longer applicable after its termination. In a cancellation contract, the decision of the parties to terminate the contract is formally established. Cancellation agreements are also called contract termination, contract termination and contract termination.

Keep it simple, but simple when drawing up the agreement and describe the facts. Have all parties sign the agreement. Have a notary or other person testify to this. The essential condition for the implementation of an amicable termination agreement is the existence of the „reasonable performance criteria“ resulting from the court decision. The Supreme Court attributes the validity of the reciprocal cancellation agreement to the existence of a reasonable advantage from the point of view of the worker. The main ground underlying the Supreme Court`s criteria for „reasonable benefits“ in mutual cancellation agreements is that, since the worker must receive severance and severance pay upon termination of the employment contract by the employer, the preference of another method, which is not more advantageous, cannot be considered appropriate during normal life. Therefore, in many cases, and in particular where the application for a mutual cancellation agreement is made by an employer, the Supreme Court expects certain additional benefits from a „reasonable benefit“ in addition to the legal rights that would have been paid in the event of termination by the employer and not by a mutual cancellation agreement. Several Supreme Court decisions have invalidated mutual cancellation agreements, so that termination of the employment relationship is equated with „dismissal by the employer“ in the absence of additional payments or benefits, and, as a result, related reinstatement claims have been accepted by the Supreme Court. On the other hand, where a worker is required to obtain an amicable cancellation agreement, the payment of statutory duties under a mutual cancellation agreement – which would not have been paid in the event of ordinary dismissal – is considered a `reasonable advantage`. Consequently, cancellation agreements concluded in this way are considered valid in principle. Termination by mutual agreement occurs when a contract is no longer complied with, the contract can no longer be performed or the parties concerned have ceased their activities. .

. .

This entry was posted in Allgemein. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.