On recognizing the commission's decision as illegal and forcing to renegotiate the employment contract
No.6001-23-00-6ap/725 dated 19.10.2023
Plaintiff: M.M.
Defendant: KSU "Housing Fund" of the Akimat of the city (hereinafter – Housing
the foundation)
The subject of the dispute: the recognition of the commission's decision as illegal,
being forced to renegotiate the employment contract.
Review of the defendant's cassation appeal. PLOT:
On February 15, 2002, the dwelling located at 3 T.H. Street, apartment 77, city of A. (hereinafter referred to as the disputed apartment) was provided to the plaintiff on the basis of a lease agreement for housing from the state housing stock concluded with the state utility KB.
Starting from this period, the employment contract with the plaintiff was renewed every year for the following year, in the latter case until October 23, 2020.
On October 15, 2021, the plaintiff applied for the renegotiation of the contract for a new term.
By the decision of the commission for the consideration of housing issues of the Housing Stock dated April 19, 2022, the extension of the contract was refused, due to the fact that the plaintiff is not an employee of a budget organization.
The plaintiff appealed to the court with the above requirements, arguing that the defendant unlawfully refused to renegotiate the lease agreement with the plaintiff.
Judicial acts:
1st instance: the claim is satisfied.
It was decided: to declare illegal the decision of the Commission for the consideration of housing issues of the Housing Stock dated November 22, 2021 on the refusal to renegotiate the lease agreement of the disputed apartment with M.M.;
Oblige the Housing Fund to renegotiate the lease agreement for a dwelling located at the address: 3, T.H. Street, apartment 77, with M.M.
Appeal: the court's decision remains unchanged.
Cassation: judicial acts are upheld.
Conclusions: the local courts, satisfying the claim, indicated that the plaintiff's housing was provided on an indefinite basis in 2002.
In addition, the courts took into account that the plaintiff worked in private-owned organizations from 2011 to 2022. Despite these circumstances, the apartment rental agreement with the plaintiff was extended, the last contract was concluded for a new term in 2020.
In these circumstances, the local courts reasonably applied the principle of protecting the right to trust and satisfied the plaintiff's claims.
The arguments of the author of the cassation appeal are identical in their content, meaning and purpose to the arguments given in the explanations, which were given a proper legal assessment by the court of first instance and the court of appeal.
In this regard, the judicial board considers that there are no grounds for the cancellation of the contested judicial acts and the satisfaction of the cassation appeal.
Attention!
The Law and Law Law Firm draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a specific situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you with legal advice and drafting any legal document that suits your situation.
For more information, please contact your Lawyer/Lawyer by phone; +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Lawyer Almaty Lawyer Legal service Legal advice Civil Criminal Administrative cases Arbitration disputes Law Company Kazakhstan Office Court Cases
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
