Disputes about the recovery of material damage caused by an employee
Cases of financial liability of employees for damage caused to the employer occupy a special place among labor disputes.
Unlike other labor disputes, for which a pre-trial procedure is provided for their resolution, cases of this category are considered directly in court.
Most of the disputes are about the recovery of damages from employees who are financially responsible in full for the damage caused to the employer in the performance of the employee's work duties.
According to paragraphs 1, 3 of Article 123 of the Labor Code, an employee's financial liability for damage caused to an employer occurs in the cases and amounts provided for by the Labor Code. The employee is obliged to compensate the direct actual damage caused to the employer.
Paragraph 8 of Article 123 of the Labor Code contains an exhaustive list of grounds on which the employee bears full financial responsibility for the damage caused to the employer.
By virtue of article 120 of the Labor Code, the financial liability of a party to an employment contract for damage (harm) caused by it to the other party to the employment contract occurs for damage (harm) caused as a result of culpable unlawful behavior (action or omission) and the causal relationship between the culpable unlawful behavior and the damage (harm) caused, unless otherwise provided this Code and other laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
Thus, the following civil case is of interest, considered by the Pavlodar City Court, the decision of which recovered material damage in the amount of 310,438 tenge in favor of individual entrepreneur G.A.I.S.Sh.A.s.
Appealing to the court with a claim, the plaintiff referred to the fact that due to the fault of the defendant, with whom an agreement on full individual financial liability was concluded, there was a shortage of inventory in the amount of 411,254 tenge.
The court, satisfying the claims, indicated that an agreement on full individual financial liability was concluded with the defendant according to the type of work performed by him, which is consistent with subparagraph 1 of paragraph 8 of Article 123 of the Labor Code.
In addition, the court took into account the fact that Sh.A.S. did not deny his guilt in causing damage to the employer, and undertook to compensate him.
In this situation, the court correctly decided to compensate for the damage (shortfall) identified by the results of the audit report, which was not disputed by the defendant.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
